Landmark Study Finds Semaglutide Effectively Treats Serious Liver Disease
Semaglutide is the key component of weight loss and diabetes drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy, and an international team of researchers has now discovered it can also do wonders for people who have developed liver disease.
In a phase 3 clinical trial involving 800 participants and lasting 72 weeks, a weekly dose of semaglutide was effective in almost two-thirds of patients at treating a serious form of fatty liver disease known as Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatohepatitis (MASH).
"The results from this landmark study across 37 countries provide strong evidence that semaglutide can help patients with MASH by not only improving liver health, but also addressing the underlying metabolic issues that contribute to the disease," says Arun Sanyal, a professor of medicine at Virginia Commonwealth University.
The participants were split into two groups. Of those given the semaglutide treatment, 62.9 percent saw improvements in their MASH, compared to 34.3 percent of the group given a placebo treatment instead.
What's more, liver fibrosis (scarring) – which happens as the liver tries to repair damage – was reduced in 36.8 percent of patients given the semaglutide treatment, compared to 22.4 percent of patients given placebos.
Improvements in both MASH and fibrosis were seen in 32.7 percent of the participants on semaglutide, compared to 16.1 percent of the placebo group. It's a comprehensive win for the drug, which is showing potential in many different areas of health.
That placebo effect is fairly typical, by the way, and often happens in trials: it's thought to be a combination of the psychological boost of thinking you're being treated, plus a tendency to live more healthily and carefully if you know you're part of a study.
"If approved, this could offer an additional therapeutic option for patients with MASH and fibrosis," says Sanyal.
"This is crucial, given the strong link between MASH and cardiovascular, metabolic, and renal conditions, where semaglutide has already shown established health benefits."
Semaglutide is a GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) receptor agonist, essentially acting like the natural GLP-1 hormone to help regulate key metabolic processes – including reducing appetite and lowering blood sugar.
That makes it effective for treating obesity and diabetes, but this boost in biological regulation seems to have plenty of other benefits too. When it comes to liver disease, the thinking is that the metabolism and anti-inflammatory improvements triggered by the drug help to treat some of the key drivers of MASH.
This clinical trial is continuing, expanding to a larger group of people for a full five years to see if these initial improvements continue. With only one approved treatment available for MASH, new options are urgently needed.
"By treating both liver disease and its metabolic causes, semaglutide offers a promising new approach for millions of patients," says Sanyal.
The research has been published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Alzheimer's Could Be Linked to a Common Virus You Already Have
Common Gut Fungus May Protect Against Fatty Liver Disease, Study Finds
Whooping Cough Is on The Rise: An Expert Explains How to Protect Your Family
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
25 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Hurdles to GLP-1s threaten the lives of our patients
The May 26 front-page article 'Patients face new hurdles to affordable obesity drugs' highlighted significant barriers patients and providers face in accessing GLP-1 and dual GLP-1/GIP receptor agonists (such as Ozempic, Mounjaro, Wegovy, Tirzepatide and Zepbound) for weight management. However, one critical group whose lives may depend on these medications was absent: individuals with end-stage organ failure. For these patients, the path to a lifesaving transplant is often long and uncertain. Many wait years on transplant lists — if they can get on one at all. Obesity is a major obstacle in this process. It not only reduces the likelihood of being listed for transplantation but also increases the risk of poor outcomes posttransplant, including higher rates of failure of their transplanted organ, wound complications, heart disease and diabetes. GLP-1 medications have demonstrated benefits beyond weight loss, including reducing the risk of heart disease and slowing the progression of kidney disease in certain populations. These benefits could improve both pre- and posttransplant outcomes, offering a critical bridge to transplantation and enhancing long-term survival. Yet access to these medications is increasingly limited. Many insurance companies have removed them from the lists of drugs that they cover, restricted the duration of use, or required patients to try other, often inappropriate, treatments first and show they aren't working. For people with organ failure, particularly those with kidney disease, there are few to no safe and effective alternatives. This leaves a growing number of patients unable to access the only medications that might improve their transplant eligibility. Medicare provides indefinite coverage for dialysis — a life-sustaining but extremely costly intervention — yet does not cover GLP-1 medications prescribed for weight loss that could help patients lose enough weight to become eligible for a kidney transplant, ultimately reducing or even eliminating the need for dialysis. Expanding access to these therapies for individuals with end-stage organ failure is not only an issue of equity and compassion — it is also a sound fiscal strategy. By improving transplant eligibility and outcomes, we can reduce long-term dependence on dialysis, resulting in substantial cost savings for Medicare and other health-care payers. Though cash payment options exist, the out-of-pocket cost — often several hundred dollars per month — is simply unaffordable for many patients. This financial barrier exacerbates existing disparities and deepens inequities in access to transplant care. Focusing on patients with organ failure presents a clear opportunity to save lives and reduce health-care costs. We urge policymakers and drug manufacturers to prioritize this narrow but critically important population by lowering the cost and improving access to GLP-1 medications. For these individuals, access is about survival. Sima Saberi, Ann Arbor, Michigan Vineeta Kumar, Birmingham, Alabama Mohammad Kazem Fallahzadeh, Winston Salem, North Carolina Krista Lentine, St. Louis Hector Madariaga, Cambridge, Massachusetts Pooja Budhiraja, Phoenix Vasanthi Balaraman, Memphis Prince Mohan Anand, Lancaster, South Carolina Kenneth J. Woodside, Charleston, South Carolina Sabiha M. Hussain, Philadelphia The writers are physicians who provide care for people with organ transplants. The May 30 online Fact Checker analysis, 'Are 4.8 million people on Medicaid 'cheating the system,'' cut to the heart of a growing crisis: the way data is being twisted to justify cruelty, particularly against people like me. I'm autistic, and I've had to rely on Medicaid — not because I don't want to work, but because I live in a society that doesn't always make room for people like me to thrive, or even survive, on its terms. I've spent much of my adult life navigating a system that treats vulnerability as a burden and not as a fact of human existence. That's why I was so disturbed by Sen. Joni Ernst's (R-Iowa) response at a recent town hall, when a constituent in Butler County warned that proposed budget cuts under President Donald Trump's administration would lead people to die. Ernst smiled and replied, 'Well, we are all going to die.' That smile and her dismissive wave of the hand might have been the product of awkwardness. But indifference to injustice can be deeply damaging. Ernst wasn't denying that deaths would happen. She was suggesting they don't really matter because death comes for us all. There's a chilling difference between acknowledging mortality and brushing off preventable deaths as unimportant. When our leaders fail to take the lives of their most vulnerable constituents seriously, it sends a message: that those lives have no place in their political calculations. That we are disposable. The Post's Fact Checker analysis showed that the 4.8 million figure cited by House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) was a projection of people who would lose Medicaid insurance if the House bill became law. The people being painted as 'cheaters' are often the sick, disabled, elderly or those caring for others full-time. They are people whose work might not fit into conventional molds, but whose lives and contributions matter deeply. Ernst's comment might have sounded like a joke to some. To me, as someone who knows how fragile survival can be, it sounded like a warning. A government that makes light of your death is not a government that's protecting your life. Matthew Lovewell, Pittsburgh We are facing a crisis in coverage for obesity care, leaving countless Americans struggling to access treatment for this chronic disease. As highlighted by the May 26 front-page article 'Patients face new hurdles to affordable obesity drugs,' the lack of obesity care coverage for GLP-1 medications not only strains an inundated health-care system and its overwhelmed providers, but also has a significant human and financial cost for patients, insurers and employers. The status quo must change. Despite obesity being recognized as a chronic, treatable disease that is associated with more than 200 other health conditions, insurers continue to place barriers on coverage for obesity care. Furthermore, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' recent decision not to expand coverage of obesity management medications through Medicare and Medicaid underscored the ongoing struggle individuals living with obesity face in accessing care. The costs of not treating obesity are staggering. Collectively, diseases linked to obesity cost our nation's health-care system more than $1.7 trillion each year. Additionally, obesity costs employers approximately $425 billion annually in the form of increased medical costs, disability payments, workers' compensation programs and absenteeism. Providing coverage for the full range of evidence-based care is crucial in addressing the significant consequences of obesity. Patients should be able to work with their health-care provider to decide on the best evidence-based obesity treatment — and have insurance coverage for that care. We must all call on insurers, employers and policymakers to ensure comprehensive obesity care is covered just like any other chronic disease — it's only fair. Millicent Gorham, Washington The writer is CEO of the Alliance for Women's Health and Prevention. Regarding the May 28 front-page article 'RFK Jr. remolds policy on covid': Although the coronavirus vaccines for children and adults are safe and effective, the Food and Drug Administration removed them from its recommended immunization schedule for healthy children and pregnant women. This is incredibly irresponsible. Children play a significant role in the transmission of the coronavirus. During the pandemic, more than 70 percent of household coronavirus transmissions originated with a child, and data shows that young children can be considerable transmission vectors within households, despite having lower viral loads. Many infected children are asymptomatic, making it harder to identify and control the spread. This means children who might be infected but do not show symptoms can transmit the virus to others. It is true that most children generally present with mild disease and exhibit lower hospitalization rates than adults. However, infected children can experience long covid and its long-term effects, including fatigue and muscle weakness. Pregnant women also face a higher risk of developing severe coronavirus complications compared with nonpregnant individuals. Without vaccination, they are more likely to require intensive care and mechanical ventilation, are at a higher risk of mortality and severe illness, and are four times more likely to be hospitalized than vaccinated pregnant women. Coronavirus infection during pregnancy can lead to serious complications, including a higher risk of preterm birth, an increased likelihood of developing preeclampsia and a greater chance of gestational diabetes. And a mother vaccinated against the coronavirus can transfer protective antibodies to the fetus, providing immunity to the newborn after birth. The benefits of coronavirus immunization far outweigh any potential risks, establishing it as a vital preventive measure for children and all pregnant women. It is irresponsible not to recommend and support its use. A.J. Russo, Chincoteague, Virginia The writer is author of 'Vaccine Development and the Understanding of Immunity.' I am a doctor, and I spent the majority of my career as executive director of the Pasco County Health Department in Florida. Limiting access to the coronavirus vaccine conflicts with recommended public health policy. Denying and discouraging lifesaving vaccines to at-risk groups will increase the rates of death and disability caused by this serious disease. Political interference with recommended public health policy concerning this disease has already taken a terrible toll on Americans. Yet politicians turn a blind eye to their responsibility bucking professional and expert guidance from the New England Journal of Medicine and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Those who allowed this disease to race through the American population should be held accountable, not shielded. Now again, an untrained and questionably informed bureaucrat, wants to compromise protections for millions of Americans who should be getting the vaccine. I believe the Food and Drug Administration's changes to its approval process for the coronavirus vaccine has a serious potential to allow this disease to race out of control again. I continue to have full confidence in the recommendations made by professional public health scientists and doctors. When government agencies choose to blind themselves to studies and recommendations, we all pay a terrible price. Marc J. Yacht, Hudson, Florida
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Women on Weight-Loss Drugs Warned of Surprise ‘Ozempic Babies'
Women taking popular weight-loss drugs have been urged to use effective contraception while taking the medication amid reports of a so-called "Ozempic babies" phenomenon. The advice was issued by the United Kingdom's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), an executive agency of the Department of Health and Social Care, on Thursday. Newsweek reached out to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for comment via email. Demand for weight-loss drugs, including GLP-1 medications such as Ozempic, Wegovy, and Mounjaro, has surged in the United States. In May 2024, a KFF Health Tracking Poll found that approximately 6 percent of American adults—about 15 million people—were using GLP-1 agonists such as Ozempic, either for diabetes treatment or weight loss. Some experts have cautioned that women should use effective contraception while taking these medications amid reports that they may be linked to an increase in unexpected pregnancies, The Guardian reported last May. The MHRA issued its alert after receiving 40 reports related to pregnancies while using "GLP-1 medicines," which are known by the brand names Ozempic, Mounjaro, Wegovy, Saxenda, and Victoza. Ozempic and Wegovy contain semaglutide, which mimics the GLP-1 hormone to increase insulin, slow digestion, and suppress appetite. Mounjaro contains tirzepatide, which acts on an additional hormone related to blood sugar and appetite control. The MHRA warned that Mounjaro may reduce the effectiveness of oral contraceptives in people who are overweight. It received 26 pregnancy-related reports for Mounjaro alone. "Therefore, those taking Mounjaro who are overweight and are using an oral form of contraception are advised to also use a non-oral form of contraception," the agency said. "This only applies to those taking Mounjaro and is especially important for the four weeks after starting Mounjaro and after any dose increase." Hundreds of women have shared personal accounts of unplanned pregnancies while using these medications in online groups, including the Facebook group "I got pregnant on Ozempic." "My ozempic baby...I see so many posts about ozempic and asking for "stories or side effects," but I never see anyone warning about pregnancy... lol," one woman shared on Facebook. "If you don't know, I got pregnant on ozempic and so many other women have too..I was on ozempic for 6 weeks & found out I was pregnant. I was so scared, google had me frightened I would miscarry because of the ozempic. I then came across a group called 'I got pregnant on ozempic'. I started reading all of these stories about women fighting infertility and getting pregnant on ozempic." The Food and Drug Administration has not yet issued similar advisories in the United States. MHRA Chief Safety Officer Dr. Alison Cave said: "Skinny jabs are medicines licensed to treat specific medical conditions and should not be used as aesthetic or cosmetic treatments. They are not a quick fix to lose weight, and have not been assessed to be safe when used in this way. "Our guidance offers patients a 'one stop shop' for our up-to-date advice on how to use these powerful medicines safely. "This guidance should not be used as a substitute to reading the patient information leaflet or having a conversation with a healthcare professional as part of the prescribing process." Dr. Ilana Ressler, a reproductive endocrinologist at Illume Fertility, told Interesting Engineering on May 22: "There is this phenomenon of Ozempic what I think what's happening is women who may not have been ovulating before with the improvements that the medication is bringing on, that might be helping them to ovulate more regularly and they might be more likely to conceive while on the medication than not—so it is recommended to avoid pregnancy while taking the medication." Dr. Zuri A. Murrell, in a video on X last year: "There is nothing magical about the medicine that's in Ozempic that helps you get pregnant. But what it does is that a lot of times, when people can't, it's because of a hormone weight imbalance. "And so, when you lose weight, and sometimes when you lose weight rapidly, the hormones and the new you aren't in concert. Or they really are in concert, and guess what can happen, pregnancy. "So, it's not the Ozempic itself, it is actually the balancing out of your hormones. That means that you've lost fat, and that the body actually for you is working like it should. So just remember, Ozempic is not something that somebody takes and 'I'm pregnant.' What it does do is cause your body and hormone level to be more in sync and more likely that you can." It remains unclear whether the FDA will follow the MHRA's lead in issuing similar warnings or guidance on contraception. Related Articles Therapist Asks Who Women 'Want To Be Skinny For'-Her Theory Is Eye-OpeningThe Good Life: Weight Loss Wins, But at What Cost?How Ozempic and Other GLP-1 Drugs Are Eating Away at Body PositivityGen Z Is Leading a New Weight Loss Trend: Ozempic Microdosing 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
TikTok Banned the "SkinnyTok" Hashtag. It's Only a Matter of Time Until a New Insidious Diet Trend Replaces It
iantfoto In this op-ed, Features Director Brittney McNamara considers TikTok's SkinnyTok hashtag ban and the seemingly unbeatable monster of diet culture. If you've been on social media lately, you undoubtedly know about #SkinnyTok. Along with the rise in popularity of weight loss drugs like Zepbound and Wegovy over the last few years, thinness as an ideal has also returned to our cultural lexicon, spawning a whole hashtag full of creators discussing how they get and stay thin, swapping diet and workout tips that encourage sometimes extreme measures to be skinny. But on June 3, TikTok banned #SkinnyTok as a search term after concern from European legislators about how the app can negatively impact young people's body image, according to the New York Times. The hashtag had 'become linked to unhealthy weight loss content,' TikTok said in its reasoning for the ban, something the European Commission was investigating because of the potential 'public health risk' associated with promoting 'extreme thinness' to young people online, Politico reports. Now, when users enter that search term, they'll be directed to resources like the National Alliance for Eating Disorders. We know that social media can negatively affect our mental health, and can contribute to body image issues like body dysmorphia and even eating disorders, so this move is an all-around win. There is no benefit — even if society would like to tell you there is — to promoting extreme thinness or unhealthy diets, things that #SkinnyTok was often associated with. But even though the ban is a net positive in this sense, it's simply a bandaid on a much larger issue. Until we reckon with our cultural obsession with thinness and our wholesale buy-in to diet culture, #SkinnyTok will simply shift and transform, taking on a new slender shape online. According to Today, #SkinnyTok began appearing on TikTok around the start of this year, gaining steam in March and April. Videos under the hashtag encouraged viewers to eat less, making hunger seem like a virtue and repackaging harmful diet advice as 'tough love." If you weren't dieting and participating in behaviors to make yourself smaller, many #SkinnyTok posts were there to shame you into submission. It's not clear exactly who started the hashtag, but it is apparent how it gained popularity. Social media and other online forums have long been hotbeds for extreme diet talk and for promoting unhealthy body ideals. In the heyday of Tumblr, 'pro ana' (pro anorexia) and 'thinspo' content abounded. When those topics were banned, users found ways to evade that, substituting letters or words to signal their content to other users without triggering filters that would censor their posts. Meta whistle-blower Frances Haugen revealed internal research that found that 'when [32% of teen girls] felt bad about their bodies, Instagram made them feel worse.' As a result of that information, social media executives testified before Congress in 2021, in part about the ways their platforms impact young people's body image. Just before #SkinnyTok officially earned its title, content creator Liv Schmidt was ousted from TikTok in October 2024 because of her posts instructing viewers on how to be skinny. Her posts violated TikTok's Community Guidelines, which prohibit 'promoting disordered eating and dangerous weight loss behaviors.' But before her ban, Schmidt had more than 670,000 followers on TikTok, according to the New York Times. She claimed her instructions on how to eat less with the explicit goal of being thin were simply the pursuit of a certain aesthetic, not a roadmap to potentially disordered eating. Even more recently, Schmidt's group chat called the Skinni Societe was demonetized by Meta after The Cut published an inside look at Schmidt's advice to followers, including lines like "eat like your next weigh-in is tomorrow.' The resurgence of explicit diet talk and 'thinspo' on social media is evidence of a trend we've seen growing for a while now. The advent of GLP-1 drugs has made weight loss attainable for many, and has made getting even thinner an option for many already-thin people. And, with another Trump administration in office, a focus on thinness in society is no surprise. Research has shown a link between conservative ideology and anti-fatness, something we've seen mirrored in Trump's own language. So it's not necessarily a shock that people with fatphobic ideas would feel emboldened in this time, especially. TikTok's #SkinnyTok ban is certainly the right move, and it's encouraging to know that people searching for it on that platform will instead be served resources to cope with disordered eating. But as we can see from the long history of disordered eating and 'skinny' content online, this move is likely to remove one threat, only for another to pop up in its wake. Diet culture is much like the mythological hydra; when you cut one head off of this beast, two more grow in its place. The threats get more numerous, more insidious, the more we strike at it. To truly beat #SkinnyTok and trends like it, we'd need a cultural reckoning — one where we collectively decide that thinness isn't a value, but simply one of many states of being. We'd need to grapple with the racism and anti-Blackness baked into anti-fatness, and how promoting thinness has ties to white supremacy. We'd need to address anti-fat bias in medicine, and rethink the common tropes about fatness and health. We'd need to radically change our thinking, our social structures, our collective stereotypes. We'd need to then cauterize the wounds diet culture has left, making sure no new ugly heads could rear when we turn our backs. Judging by the current political and social climate, that seems unlikely. It's certainly possible, and maybe one day we'll get there. In the meantime, #SkinnyTok may be dead, but it's only a matter of time before another hashtag or trend telling young people to aspire to thinness crops up, another head of this seemingly unkillable hydra ready to bite us in our ever-smaller butts. Originally Appeared on Teen Vogue
