🍪 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 OutcomesDo the heart benefits go away if I stop taking it? — looking for input

Do the heart benefits go away if I stop taking it? — looking for input

DeniseRN_TPA Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 12:02 AM 45 replies 2,308 viewsPage 1 of 9
This thread is more than 19 months old. Information may be outdated. Consider searching for more recent discussions.
DeniseRN_TPA
Member
345
1,567
Aug 2024
Tampa, FL
Oct 19, 2024 at 12:02 AM#1

Posting this because the summary going around does not say what the paper says, and the difference matters for how people here are using it.

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.

Where I think it is weakest: the subgroup findings are the part I trust least — with enough subgroups something is always significant, and these were not all pre-registered.

What I actually want to know is how much of the SELECT benefit is plausibly independent of the weight loss, and whether that distinction changes anything practical. Happy to be told the question itself is wrong.

Note on sourcing:
Figures above are from the primary publication rather than the press summary. If a number here disagrees with one you have, post yours and we will work out which of us is reading a secondary source.
29 24jim_asheville, matt_MKE, Dr.ReproEndo and 26 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
TrialTracker_MD
Senior Member
2,345
15,678
Jan 2024
Maryland
Oct 19, 2024 at 2:00 AM#2
DeniseRN_TPA 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…
DeniseRN_TPA said:
...we're creating a generation dependent on cardiovascular risk...

I understand the concern, but consider this analogy: are we "creating a generation dependent on" blood pressure medication? Cholesterol medication? Thyroid medication?

Obesity is a chronic disease with biological drivers. Treating it with medication is no different from treating any other chronic condition. The "dependency" framing implies weakness or moral failure — neither of which is accurate.

If ongoing medication is what keeps someone healthy, that's successful treatment, not dependency.

28 23stefan_berlin, Dr.EM_Chicago, pete_RVA and 25 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
LibrarianMeg
Senior Member
1,678
7,890
Mar 2024
Baltimore, MD
Oct 19, 2024 at 3:58 AM#3
DeniseRN_TPA 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…

Pushing back on DeniseRN_TPA here. 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.

27 22julia.endo, JessicaM_2024, TomFromTexas and 24 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.AddMedPHL
Senior Member
1,234
6,234
Mar 2024
Philadelphia, PA
Oct 19, 2024 at 5:56 AM#4
LibrarianMeg said:
The "earlier than weight loss explains" argument is weaker than this thread makes it sound.

SUSTAIN-6 was the first CVOT to show cardiovascular benefit with semaglutide, relevant to cardiovascular risk. In 3,297 T2DM patients with high CV risk: MACE HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.58-0.95, p=0.02)[1].

Notable: the retinopathy signal in SUSTAIN-6 (HR 1.76) was subsequently attributed to rapid A1C reduction in patients with pre-existing retinopathy — not a direct drug effect. This has been confirmed in longer-term follow-up studies.

References:
[1] Marso SP, et al. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(19):1834-1844.
26 21TomFromTexas, mike.trainer_LA, sarah_nash92 and 23 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
robert_kc
Member
289
1,234
Oct 2024
Kansas City, MO
Oct 19, 2024 at 5:35 PM#5
TrialTracker_MD said:
DeniseRN_TPA said: ...we're creating a generation dependent on cardiovascular risk...

Second this.

Last edited: Oct 19, 2024 at 7:35 PM
25 20PharmHunterJen, TomTeleRx, DoseLogDan and 22 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
1239

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