Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Efficacy and Safety of GLP‐1 and Dual GIP/GLP‐1 Receptor Agonists in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Efficacy and Safety of GLP‐1 and Dual GIP/GLP‐1 Receptor Agonists in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Efficacy and Safety of GLP‐1 and Dual GIP/GLP‐1 Receptor Agonists in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Efficacy and Safety of GLP‐1 and Dual GIP/GLP‐1 Receptor Agonists in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
2025
Overview
ABSTRACT
Background
Repurposing glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1) and GIP/GLP‐1 receptor agonists (RAs) for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) represents an attractive alternative to current treatments, supported by evidence of potent metabolic effects and reductions in cerebrospinal fluid secretion and intracranial pressure in vivo.
Methods
We evaluated the safety and efficacy of GLP‐1 RAs and GIP/GLP‐1 RAs in IIH. MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched for randomized‐controlled trials (RCT), non‐randomized clinical trials, or registries in adults with IIH.
Results
Two clinical trials (one RCT and one non‐randomized case–control) and two registries, comprising 1550 IIH patients (768 receiving GLP‐1 or GIP/GLP‐1 RAs) were included. Compared with standard‐of‐care, GLP‐1 or GIP/GLP‐1 RAs were associated with a significantly lower risk of papilledema (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.15–0.43; p < 0.01) and visual disturbances or blindness (RR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.18–0.92; p = 0.03), and a near‐significant trend toward reduced headache risk (RR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.34–1.07; p = 0.08). Additionally, GLP‐1 RAs significantly reduced monthly headache days at 3 months (MD = −3.64; 95% CI: −6.26 to −1.03; p < 0.01) and at the end of follow‐up (MD = −4.82; 95% CI: −8.80 to −0.85; p = 0.02). No association was detected between GLP‐1 RAs and body mass index. No serious adverse events or treatment discontinuations were reported; mild gastrointestinal adverse events and nausea occurred in 88% (95% CI: 0.46–1.00) of GLP‐1 RA‐treated patients.
Conclusions
GLP‐1 and dual GIP/GLP‐1 RAs are associated with a significantly lower risk of papilledema and visual disturbances or blindness and a lower headache risk compared with standard‐of‐care. Additionally, GLP‐1 RAs significantly reduce the monthly headache burden. Well‐designed RCTs are needed to robustly evaluate the effects of GLP‐1 and GIP/GLP‐1 RAs in IIH, which likely extend beyond their weight‐loss‐inducing properties.
Trial Registration
PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42025650082
GLP‐1 and dual GIP/GLP‐1 RAs are associated with a significantly lower risk of papilledema and visual disturbances or blindness and a lower headache risk compared with standard‐of‐care. Additionally, GLP‐1 RAs significantly reduce the monthly headache burden.
Subject
