🍪 The GLP Lounge uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsCardiovascular OutcomesHeart rate increase on GLP-1 — need advice

Heart rate increase on GLP-1 — need advice

wei_SG Tue, Nov 4, 2025 at 6:28 AM 13 replies 1,139 viewsPage 1 of 3
This thread is more than 7 months old. Information may be outdated. Consider searching for more recent discussions.
wei_SG
Member
234
890
Nov 2024
Singapore, SG
Nov 4, 2025 at 6:28 AM#1

A reference post rather than a discussion. Corrections are the point; I would rather this be right than mine. It is about cardiovascular outcomes, and it is deliberately narrow — everything I am not confident about is marked as such.

What is actually established

SELECT is the trial that changed the framing of this class, because it was an outcome trial rather than a weight trial: about a 20% relative reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events in people with established cardiovascular disease and overweight or obesity, without diabetes. The effect appeared earlier than the weight-loss curve can comfortably explain, which is the basis for arguing that some of the benefit is direct — anti-inflammatory and vascular — rather than purely a consequence of weight.

The condition it depends on

The qualification that SELECT enrolled a secondary-prevention population. Extrapolating a 20% relative reduction to a healthy 35-year-old with a BMI of 31 is not what that trial showed.

The practical version

Relative versus absolute is the distinction that gets lost: a 20% relative reduction on a high baseline risk is a large absolute benefit, and the same relative figure on a low baseline risk is a small one.

What I am not sure about

What I am after is how much of the SELECT benefit is plausibly independent of the weight loss, and whether that distinction changes anything practical. I would rather have one careful answer than five confident ones.

— wei_SG · corrections welcome and will be edited into this post with credit
43 21WendyG_ATL, SaraMom3, Dr.MetabolicMD and 40 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
julia.endo
Senior Member
1,890
9,012
Feb 2024
Cincinnati, OH
Nov 4, 2025 at 6:44 AM#2
wei_SG said:
SELECT is the trial that changed the framing of this class, because it was an outcome trial rather than a weight trial: about a 20% relative reduction…

NNT calculation for cardiovascular risk clinical endpoints: NNT = 1/ARR (absolute risk reduction).

From SELECT trial: MACE at 39 months — 6.5% semaglutide vs 8.0% placebo. ARR = 1.5%. NNT = 67 over 3.3 years.

Compare to established therapies:

InterventionNNTTimeframe
Semaglutide (MACE)673.3 years
Statins primary prevention (MI)~1005 years
Aspirin secondary prevention~772 years

These NNTs are clinically meaningful and comparable to accepted cardiovascular interventions.

Last edited: Nov 4, 2025 at 12:44 PM
44 22mark_tokyo, hans_munich, jason_sac26 and 41 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
CarlaRPh_TPA
Senior Member
1,890
8,234
Jan 2024
Tampa, FL
Nov 4, 2025 at 7:00 AM#3
wei_SG said:
SELECT is the trial that changed the framing of this class, because it was an outcome trial rather than a weight trial: about a 20% relative reduction…

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The "earlier than weight loss explains" argument is weaker than this thread makes it sound. Blood pressure and inflammatory markers move fast and are downstream of early weight loss, so the mechanism is not as cleanly separable as the summaries imply.

45 23BrianDallas92, labquiet_amy, emily_PDX and 42 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

PeptideMeter — Independent Peptide Analytics

Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.

View Results
Dr.LipidDallas
VIP Member
2,678
14,567
Dec 2023
Dallas, TX
Nov 4, 2025 at 7:16 AM#4
CarlaRPh_TPA said:
The "earlier than weight loss explains" argument is weaker than this thread makes it sound.

Anti-inflammatory mechanisms of GLP-1 agonists and cardiovascular risk: beyond weight loss, GLP-1R activation directly suppresses NF-κB signaling, reduces NLRP3 inflammasome activation, and decreases monocyte/macrophage adhesion to endothelium[1].

Clinical correlates: hsCRP reduction of 30-60% (consistently seen across trials), reduced carotid intima-media thickness, and decreased coronary plaque inflammation on PET imaging.

These anti-inflammatory effects likely contribute to the cardiovascular benefit seen in SELECT — and may explain benefits beyond what weight loss alone would predict.

References:
[1] Hogan AE, et al. Diabetologia. 2014;57(4):781-784.
46 24lori_vegas, Dr.PulmRoch, maya_sedona and 43 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
nancy_portland
Member
345
1,567
Aug 2024
Portland, ME
Nov 4, 2025 at 8:39 AM#5
julia.endo said:
NNT calculation for cardiovascular risk clinical endpoints: NNT = 1/ARR (absolute risk reduction).

Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.

Last edited: Nov 4, 2025 at 9:39 AM
47 0claudia_zurich, nancy_portland, rick_sfbay and 44 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

SELECT trial: 20% MACE reduction — mechanistic deep dive7 replies
Semaglutide cardiovascular benefit independent of weight loss11 replies
STEP-HFpEF: semaglutide in heart failure with preserved EF15 replies
GLP-1 and arterial inflammation — hsCRP and IL-6 reduction data18 replies
Lp(a) on GLP-1 agonists — any impact on this risk factor?8 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register