🍪 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 OutcomesCoronary artery calcium score changes on GLP-1 — 2-year follow-up

Coronary artery calcium score changes on GLP-1 — 2-year follow-up

Dr.RaviCardio Thu, May 28, 2026 at 5:26 PM 14 replies 356 viewsPage 1 of 3
Dr.RaviCardio
VIP Member
2,890
15,678
Jan 2024
New York, NY
May 28, 2026 at 6:51 PM#1

Coronary artery calcium score changes on GLP-1 — 2-year follow-up

Posting this for discussion as it's directly relevant to our cardiovascular outcomes community. I'll summarize the key findings and then share my interpretation.

Background: Coronary artery calcium score changes on has been a topic of significant interest. The latest data adds substantially to our understanding of the efficacy and safety profile in this area.

Key findings:

  • Primary endpoint met with statistical significance (p<0.001)
  • Effect size consistent with or exceeding Phase 2 projections
  • Adverse event profile in line with the known GLP-1 receptor agonist class effects — primarily GI (nausea 20-25%, diarrhea 12-17%)
  • Subgroup analyses showed benefit across BMI categories, age groups, and baseline metabolic status

My interpretation:

This is meaningful for several reasons. First, it confirms that the results from earlier-phase trials are reproducible at scale. Second, the safety data with longer follow-up is reassuring. Third, the subgroup consistency suggests this isn't driven by a specific patient phenotype.

I'd love to hear from others — especially those with clinical or research backgrounds. What are the limitations you see? What questions remain unanswered?

References:
[1] See thread title for study identification. Full citation available via PubMed/ClinicalTrials.gov.
— Dr.RaviCardio | Posted in Cardiovascular Outcomes
33 14pete_manc_UK, anna.melb_AU, mark_tokyo and 30 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.NateNeph
VIP Member
2,987
16,234
Dec 2023
Houston, TX
May 28, 2026 at 7:08 PM#2

Clinical perspective on Coronary artery calcium score changes on:

I have managed ~150 patients on GLP-1 therapy and this topic comes up frequently. What the data shows — and what I see in practice — is that proper titration prevents most adverse events.

For this specific question, I would recommend: reviewing the relevant clinical guidelines.

36 8NauseaFreeNow, SteveThurs, B12Beth and 33 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.ReproEndo
Senior Member
1,890
8,901
Jan 2024
Scottsdale, AZ
May 28, 2026 at 7:25 PM#3
Dr.NateNeph said:
What the data shows — and what I see in practice — is that proper titration prevents most adverse ev

This is exactly right. Dr.NateNeph articulated what I have been trying to explain to my friends for months. The Coronary artery calcium aspect is what made the difference for me.

4 12Dr.EndoEP, GraceAZ_72, carl_compliance and 1 other
Reply Quote Save Share Report
BiostatsBrad
Member
456
2,345
Jul 2024
Durham, NC
May 28, 2026 at 7:42 PM#4

Relevant to Coronary artery calcium score — here is my latest bloodwork comparison:

Key improvements: A1C 8.0% → 5.3%, triglycerides 207 → 107 mg/dL, hsCRP 6.0 → 1.3 mg/L. All on tirzepatide for 11 months.

The inflammatory marker drop is what impresses me most. Consistent with the SELECT trial's cardiovascular findings.

Last edited: May 28, 2026 at 8:42 PM
6 24james_edin, FranDenver, Dr.BariatricHTX and 3 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
TrialTracker_MD
Senior Member
2,345
15,678
Jan 2024
Maryland
May 28, 2026 at 7:59 PM#5
Dr.NateNeph said:
What the data shows — and what I see in practice — is that proper titration prevents most adverse ev

I respect Dr.NateNeph perspective but I think this oversimplifies things a bit. Re: Coronary artery calcium score — the subgroup analyses show meaningful heterogeneity.

I am not saying Dr.NateNeph wrong entirely — just that the picture is more nuanced than a blanket statement. The STEP data specifically shows dose-dependent variation.

29 24lori_vegas, Dr.PulmRoch, maya_sedona and 26 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

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