Table 3.
Summary of findings of the key outcomes of this systematic review and meta-analysis
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Risk with Control (Semaglutide-2.4mg) | Risk with Cagrisema (2.4mg/2.4mg) | ||||
| Body Weight percent reduction | The mean body weight percent reduction was -7.3% | MD 9.07 lower (11.91 lower to 6.23 lower) | - | 98 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕◯◯ Lowa,b |
| Body weight Reduction | The mean body weight reduction was -7 kg | MD 9.11 lower (12.84 lower to 5.39 lower) | - | 98 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕◯◯ Lowa,b |
| Treatment-emergent Adverse Events | 818 per 1,000 | 804 per 1,000 (598 to 920) | OR 0.91 (0.33 to 2.55) | 98 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊕ High |
| Severe adverse events | 55 per 1,000 | 19 per 1,000 (2 to 152) | OR 0.33 (0.04 to 3.11) | 98 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊕ High |
| Gastrointestinal adverse events | 527 per 1,000 | 764 per 1,000 (558 to 893) | OR 2.91 (1.13 to 7.46) | 98 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊕ High |
|
| |||||
| Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | |||||
|
| |||||
| Risk with control (Semaglutide/liraglutide) | Risk with cagrilintide 2.4 mg | ||||
|
| |||||
| Body weight percent reduction | The mean body weight Percent Reduction was -7.05% | MD 1.83 lower (4.08 lower to 0.42 higher) | - | 262 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕◯◯ Lowa,b |
| Body weight | The mean body weight reduction was -7.45 kg | MD 1.88 lower (4.23 lower to 0.47 higher) | - | 262 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕◯◯ Lowa,b |
| Treatment-emergent Adverse Events | 785 per 1,000 | 779 per 1,000 (663 to 864) | OR 0.97 (0.54 to 1.75) | 262 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊕ High |
| Severe adverse events | 631 per 1,000 | 619 per 1,000 (445 to 768) | OR 0.95 (0.47 to 1.94) | 262 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊕ High |
| Gastrointestinal adverse events ACG | 615 per 1,000 | 517 per 1,000 (396 to 636) | OR 0.67 (0.41 to 1.09) | 262 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊕ High |
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI); CI: confidence interval; MD: mean difference; OR: odds ratio; Explanations: a: I2 is >75% suggestive of considerable heterogeneity in data; b. A funnel plot is suggestive of the presence of most of the studies outside the plot, hence it is likely that significant publication bias is present