🍪 CompoundTalk 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 Mon, Mar 2, 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
Mar 2, 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
9 17pete_manc_UK, anna.melb_AU, mark_tokyo and 6 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.NateNeph
VIP Member
2,987
16,234
Dec 2023
Houston, TX
Mar 2, 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.

47 20NauseaFreeNow, SteveThurs, B12Beth and 44 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.ReproEndo
Senior Member
1,890
8,901
Jan 2024
Scottsdale, AZ
Mar 2, 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.

23 24Dr.EndoEP, GraceAZ_72, carl_compliance and 20 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Janoshik Analytical — Independent Testing

Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.

Verify Your Peptides
BiostatsBrad
Member
456
2,345
Jul 2024
Durham, NC
Mar 2, 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: Mar 2, 2026 at 8:42 PM
11 14james_edin, FranDenver, Dr.BariatricHTX and 8 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
TrialTracker_MD
Senior Member
2,345
15,678
Jan 2024
Maryland
Mar 2, 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.

50 8lori_vegas, Dr.PulmRoch, maya_sedona and 47 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