logo
GLP-1 Agonists Reduce Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation

GLP-1 Agonists Reduce Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation

Medscape16-05-2025

SAN DIEGO — Patients with obesity and diabetes are at a substantially reduced risk of having a recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after ablation if they are taking a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist vs another diabetes drug, according to an analysis of matched cohorts with 3 years of follow-up.
The study was retrospective, but it included more than 2500 patients taking a GLP-1 or one of the two comparators, reported Varun Sundaram, MD, PhD, section chief, Advanced Heart Failure, Louis Stokes Cleveland Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, Cleveland.
After a median of 3.1 years of follow-up, the odds ratio (OR) of the primary composite outcome of time to first AF hospitalization, an AF-related procedure, or all-cause mortality was reduced by 13% (OR, 0.87; P = .03) compared with treatment with a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitor or sulfonylurea.
Weight Loss Might Not Explain Effect
While weight loss on the GLP-1 did occur, Sundaram speculates that it did not fully explain the benefit of the drug, as it was only modestly greater than in the control arms (14.1% vs 10.9%). He instead believes GLP-1s have 'pleiotropic' effects, resulting in a favorable impact on the metabolic abnormalities that provide a substrate for AF recurrence.
An antidiabetic drug with a favorable impact on the long-term risk for AF recurrence is an important unmet need, according to Sundaram. While ablation offers high rates of acute AF control, he pointed to the fact that one third of patients have a recurrence within 1 year and that rates continue to rise with longer follow-ups.
'We believe this is likely related to progressive atrial substrate remodeling,' said Sundaram, who said this study supports the ability of GLP-1s to reduce the residual risk for AF recurrence after a primary ablation.
In this trial, called TRANSFORM-AF, which was a late-breaking clinical trial presented at Heart Rhythm 2025, patients with type 2 diabetes and a body mass index (BMI) > 30 who were starting a new prescription of a GLP-1, DPP-4 inhibitor, or sulfonylurea were drawn from a pool of more than 70,000 patients in the VA system.
After propensity matching on the basis of 31 covariates, 1226 patients starting a GLP-1 were compared with 1284 of those taking either a DPP-4 inhibitor or sulfonylurea. The standardized between-group difference for any one of the covariates was less than 10%.
In a secondary analysis that assessed repeating AF events with mortality as a competing risk, the risk reduction of AF recurrence over the course of follow-up was 15% (OR, 0.85), which suggested a trend (95% CI, 0.61-1.03).
The TRANSFORM-AF study was limited to patients with AF and diabetes only because this is the population in the VA system taking a GLP-1. Sundaram said it is unknown if a similar reduction in recurrence would be observed in patients without diabetes with or without obesity taking a GLP-1.
The major limitation of this study was that it was not randomized, Sundaram acknowledged. Despite propensity matching, he cautioned that the risk for residual confounding cannot be excluded.
Randomized Trial Needed
A randomized trial is needed to confirm these findings, but Sundaram said such a trial will be 'challenging' for a number of reasons. In patients with obesity and diabetes, a study design that includes randomizing patients to drugs other than GLP-1 might impair recruitment. The long-term follow-up required to accrue sufficient events might also make the study cost unattractive.
The association between GLP-1 and a reduced risk for AF recurrence in TRANSFORM-AF supported a hypothesis based on experimental studies. In a 2023 editorial accompanying a published study showing a reduction in AF in an animal model of diabetes, the authors of the editorial cited other effects — such as improvement in left ventricular function that they saw as support for effects beyond weight loss and a basis for conducting clinical trials.
The level of interest in the concept modifying the substrate of AF recurrence is 'high,' according to Sanjeev Saksena, MD, an electrophysiologist and a clinical professor of medicine at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey. He said this study is an early step in exploring the hypothesis.
Saksena considers supportive evidence from a 'robust pilot' study essential to move toward a pivotal trial. He said that the data from this study, although provocative, are insufficient for projecting benefit.
On the basis of this study alone, 'there are several reasons to question the impact on AF,' Saksena said. For one, there was a large proportion of patients with obesity, diabetes, and AF who were excluded from the analysis for various reasons. For another, AF was not measured quantitatively. He also pointed to potential problems with the matching technique to optimize two comparable groups.
As the Heart Rhythm Society–invited discussant on this study, Saksena called for a randomized trial to prove the hypothesis. He did not agree that such a controlled trial would be impossible, noting that that GLP-1 drugs such as semaglutide are not the first-line treatment for obesity, AF, or diabetes, and that more evidence of a favorable benefit-risk ratio is needed.
He pointed out that TRANSFORM-AF had many strengths. For one, the evidence of even greater benefit in those with the highest baseline BMI was reassuring. He also agreed that that new options for preventing AF recurrence are certainly needed. Saksena said he looks forward to further evidence that the evidence of benefit can be confirmed, providing a new option for clinical practice.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Colonoscopies Beat the Alternative Every Day
Colonoscopies Beat the Alternative Every Day

Wall Street Journal

time17 minutes ago

  • Wall Street Journal

Colonoscopies Beat the Alternative Every Day

I read Jim Sollisch's complaints about the discomfort of colonoscopy preparation with amusement and concern ('Colonoscopy Prep Is Worse Than IKEA,' op-ed, June 3). I have had 12 colonoscopies since I was 50 thanks to a family history of colon cancer. The prep is uncomfortable and inconvenient. The alternative is far worse. My father was diagnosed with this terrible cancer in 1958. Doctors gave him six months to live in a time before colostomies were common. He lasted five years—a time I cherish—but the cost to him was high. I think watching someone die from colon cancer might help Mr. Sollisch put the prep into perspective. It isn't as unbearable as he describes, and I would never want to see anyone decline a procedure for one of the most preventable cancers. If you are at risk for colon cancer, schedule your procedure today. Ken Gurak

1 in 5 people are having fewer children due to fear of the future: UN
1 in 5 people are having fewer children due to fear of the future: UN

Fast Company

time19 minutes ago

  • Fast Company

1 in 5 people are having fewer children due to fear of the future: UN

Falling fertility rates typically get blamed on the women of the world. But a new study published by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) says both men and women 'face significant barriers to realizing their fertility aspirations.' It's not that they don't want to have children—rather, they just aren't able to in the ways they want to. According to the report, barriers in political discourse, healthcare policies, financial instability, and climate change are some of the leading causes for globally declining birth rates, and furthermore, they prevent many from realizing their preferred child status. 'The evidence is clear: We are moving from a world of rapid population expansion, in the mid-20th Century, to a period of declining fertility rates,' Dr. Natalia Kanem, Executive Director of UNFPA said. UNFPA partnered with YouGov to ask 14,000 people across 14 countries what they want for their reproductive futures and why. According to the report, nearly 1 in 5 participants cited fears of the future affecting their decisions to have fewer children than desired, including concerns about climate change, environmental degradation, wars, and pandemics. Meanwhile, 39% reported financial limitations affecting their decisions. The countries included in the study represent a third of the world population, and include North Korea (the country with the lowest fertility rate), Nigeria (the country with the highest fertility rate), and the U.S. (somewhere in the middle). All participants' reasons behind their reproductive status were divided into five factors: Health, including infertility and a lack of medical care Economic, including unemployment and housing situations Changed desires, including partner or personal decisions Concerns over future, including political or climate concerns Other, including lack of partner or societal pressure 'It is hard to escape the conclusion that these concerns—which certainly warrant policy responses—are rooted in outdated notions around who should be reproducing and why, and the notion that the achievement of a country's preferred birth rate will ensure economic and political security,' Dr. Kanem said.

Chesapeake Bay watershed health declined in 2024, report shows
Chesapeake Bay watershed health declined in 2024, report shows

CBS News

time24 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Chesapeake Bay watershed health declined in 2024, report shows

The Chesapeake Bay declined in health in 2024, according to an annual report published by the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES). During the annual assessment, officials look at the ecological, societal and economic indicators. The report, which uses data from 2024, gave the Bay a C grade, while watershed health was given a C+ grade. The C grade was a five-point decrease compared to 2023. Despite the decline in health in 2024, the Bay has shown long-term improvements over the last couple of decades, the report shows. Chesapeake Bay health declined in 2024 UMCES looked at seven bay indicators and 12 watershed indicators to grade the health of the waterways. According to the report, the bay indicators, like nitrogen levels, oxygen levels and water clarity, are used to assess the health of the aquatic ecosystem, while watershed indicators look at external factors like protected lands in the area, job growth and temperatures. UMCES said the decrease in score is not surprising due to the weather conditions in 2024. According to the report, 2024 was the hottest year on record, with extreme rainfall patterns. Parts of the watershed experienced drought with short, intense bursts of rainfall that caused runoff. "These downpours can cause water to flow over the ground rather than soak into it, increasing the fertilizer, dirt and debris carried into waterways," the report said. Despite the decreased 2025 score, the Bay has shown improvements since the 1980s, according to the report. According to the report, six regions - including Elizabeth, James, Patapsco and Back Rivers, Upper Western Shore, Upper Bay and Lower Bay - have shown long-term improvements. The Upper Eastern Shore was the only region to show declining trends. The Chesapeake Bay declined in health in 2024, according to an annual report published by the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES). University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science Some indicators, like dissolved oxygen and total nitrogen levels, have also shown long-term improvements, while chlorophyll a and water clarity scores have declined, the report shows. UMCES attributed the improvements to management and restoration efforts, including upgraded wastewater treatment plants, reduced nutrient and sediment, seagrass restoration and oyster plantings. "This year's report underscores the importance of continued investment and highlights the progress we've made over the last decade," said Dr. Fernando Miralles-Wilhelm, President of UMCES. Chesapeake Bay freshwater gets saltier With more than 100,000 miles of streams and millions of acres of lakes and reservoirs, the Chesapeake Bay region provides drinking water, resources for farmers and power. In its 2025 report, UMCES determined that the Chesapeake Bay's freshwater is becoming more salty due to an issue called freshwater salinization. The change is caused by rainfall patterns, drought, rises in sea level and human activities. The report shows freshwater salinization is expected to get worse as the population in the area increases and the environment continues to change. The report recommends switching to eco- and pet-friendly salt during the winter and using less de-icing product on roads and sidewalks. Baltimore waterways show declining water quality In May, a similar study from non-profit Blue Water Baltimore found that the water quality at the Inner Harbor and surrounding watershed has declined in the past decade. According to the report, water quality at the Baltimore Harbor, Gwynn Falls and the Patapsco River regions has declined between 2013 and 2024. Water quality in the Jones Falls region slightly improved. The report detailed that chlorophyll levels were poor in most areas, while bacteria levels and dissolved oxygen levels improved.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store