We use essential cookies (authentication, your saved goals/stack) by default. With your permission we’ll also enable privacy-respecting analytics (Vercel Web Analytics, anonymous load-time metrics) and error-replay diagnostics (Sentry — DOM snapshots only when an error fires) so we can fix bugs faster. Learn more about cookies
Exe6.0
Exenatide Research
Mostly mechanism / observational
103 peer-reviewed studies
What the evidence says
Mostly mechanism / observational
Most Exenatide studies are mechanism or observational rather than RCTs that measure a clinical effect — keep findings provisional.
Most evidence is from high-quality meta-analyses and randomised trials published 2004–2026 with a typical study size of 464 participants.
Based on 103 studies · 19 meta-analyses · 75 RCTs · 74,405 total participants
Confidence
High confidence
By outcome
Blood sugar & glycemic controlConsistent HbA1c reductions (~0.8% twice-daily, ~1.3-1.9% once-weekly) across the AMIGO and DURATION phase-3 programs · Weeks to months
Mostly mechanism / observational62 studies
Weight managementDose-dependent weight reduction (typically ~1.5-3 kg) rather than weight gain · Months
Mostly mechanism / observational23 studies
Safety & adverse effects
Mostly mechanism / observational19 studies
Cardiovascular outcomes
Mostly mechanism / observational17 studies
Active research area
46 studies in the last 5 years · Latest meta-analysis: 2026
200420152026
1Meta-Analysis2019
Bonora BM, Avogaro A, Fadini GP · Acta Diabetol (2019)
In plain English: A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00)... was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority).
Holman RR, Bethel MA, Mentz RJ, Thompson VP, Lokhnygina Y, Buse JB, Chan JC, Choi J, Gustavson SM, Iqbal N, Maggioni AP, Marso SP, Öhman P, Pagidipati NJ, Poulter N, Ramachandran A, Zinman B, Hernandez AF; EXSCEL Study Group. · N Engl J Med (2017)
Large cardiovascular-outcomes RCT: 14,752 patients with type 2 diabetes (73.1% with prior cardiovascular disease), once-weekly exenatide 2 mg vs placebo added to usual care, median 3.2 years
Primary MACE composite NEUTRAL: HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.83-1.00); non-inferior for safety but NOT superior for efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority)
No significant difference in CV death, MI, stroke, heart-failure hospitalization, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, or medullary thyroid carcinoma
In plain English: Variability in urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio estimates appears to reflect duration and baseline risk more than a lack of effect.
Huang R et al. · The Journal of international medical research (2026)
Primary outcomes were change in body weight (kg) and percentage change in urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio; change in estimated glomerular filtration rate was the secondary outcome.
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists reduced body weight (mean difference, -5.85 kg; 95% confidence interval: -7.78 to -3.92) with a consistent direction of effect across studies despite heterogeneity.
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists lowered urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio overall (mean difference, -27.94%; 95% confidence interval: -37.72 to -18.15).
In plain English: Overall, GLP-1 RAs improve weight and reduce insulin requirements in T1DM, potentially mitigating indirect CV risk factors; however their direct cardiovascular benefits remain unproven in the absence of dedicated outcome trials.
Wójcik-Sosnowska E et al. · International journal of molecular sciences (2026)
HbA1c reductions were statistically significant but modest (0.2-0.3%), with no improvement in Time in Range.
Secondary benefits included lower systolic blood pressure.
Safety data were mixed: the risk of severe hypoglycemia was not increased, whereas Time Below Range and gastrointestinal adverse events were more frequent.
In plain English: Further research is needed for normal-weight patients with prediabetes, for semaglutide's post-intervention effect, and for liraglutide in men.
Tsironikos GI, Tsolaki V, Zakynthinos G, Rammou V, Kyprianidou D, Antonogiannis T, Zakynthinos E, Bargiota A. · Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews (2026)
GLP-1 RAs restored normoglycemia compared to placebo (OR 4.62, 95% CI 2.85, 7.49; p-value < 0.00001).
Both semaglutide (OR 4.87, 95% CI 2.61, 9.09; p-value < 0.00001) and liraglutide (OR 5.43, 95% CI 1.34, 22.04; p-value 0.02) were effective but not exenatide.
Heterogeneity was large (Q 84.42, p-value < 0.00001; I 2 92%, 95% CI 77, 97%), attributed to the countries' performance and post-intervention follow-up in semaglutide-based RCTs and any subgroup analysis in liraglutide-based RCTs.
In plain English: GLP-1RAs are generally acceptable and tolerated in this population.
Srisurapanont M, Suttajit S, Likhitsathian S, Suradom C, Maneeton B. · International journal of psychiatry in medicine (2026)
Compared with placebo/usual care, GLP- 1RAs significantly reduced weight (MD = 6.17 kg, 95% CI=9.10 to_3.25, I 2 = 91.8%, 9 trials) and HbA1c (MD = 0.31%, 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.22, I 2 = 51.3%, 8 trials).
All-cause dropouts did not differ significantly between groups (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.35, I 2 = 28.5%, 10 trials), nor did adverse effect dropouts (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.35 to 2.77, I 2 = 31.6%, 5 trials).
Low certainty evidence supports the tolerability and efficacy of GLP-1RAs for weight and HbA1c reduction.
In plain English: Larger, longer-duration trials are needed.
Ali M, Sharma A, Paruchuri A, Shahzad F, Khalid MB, B KN, Avanaki M, Nithyanandam A, Khan T, Suresh V. · Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (2026)
Pairwise meta-analysis showed no significant overall improvement in MDS-UPDRS Part III (MD –2.00; 95% CI –5.46 to 1.46; I² = 80.5%).
Network meta-analysis demonstrated significant ON-state motor improvement with Exenatide 20 µg/day (MD –9.80; 95% CI –14.47 to –5.13) and Lixisenatide 20 µg/day (MD –3.08; 95% CI –5.31 to –0.85).
NLY01 at 5 mg/week improved PDQ-39, while NMSS showed dose-dependent divergence.