Eisa · Diabetes, obesity & metabolism 2026 · systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials · n=20 studies (15,782 participants)

Lean Mass Changes With Incretin Therapy Versus Lifestyle Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

Cited 7 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 41877354 · doi:10.1111/dom.70666 · record verified 2026-08-27

What was done

Authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science through January 2026. They included randomized controlled trials in adults with overweight or obesity evaluating semaglutide, tirzepatide, liraglutide, or lifestyle interventions that assessed body composition by DXA or MRI. The co-primary outcomes were absolute change in lean mass (kg) and the proportion of total weight lost as lean mass, pooled using random-effects models.

What was found

Twenty RCTs including 15,782 participants were analyzed. Lean mass comprised 25% to 39% of total weight lost with incretin agonists: semaglutide 35.2% (95% CI: 31.5–38.9), tirzepatide 25.4% (95% CI: 22.8–28.0), and liraglutide 26.8% (95% CI: 23.1–30.5). Standard lifestyle interventions resulted in a comparable proportion of lean mass loss (26.2% [95% CI: 24.1–28.3]; p = 0.42 vs. incretin therapies). Lifestyle intervention combined with resistance training resulted in the lowest proportion of lean mass loss (17.5% [95% CI: 14.2–20.8]). Heterogeneity was moderate (I² = 68%), and Egger's test showed no evidence of publication bias (p = 0.23).

Why it matters

These findings indicate that the proportional loss of lean mass during incretin-induced weight loss is similar to that seen with conventional lifestyle modification. Incorporating resistance training into weight-loss regimens helps attenuate lean tissue loss.

Limits

Moderate statistical heterogeneity was observed across trials (I² = 68%). The abstract omits numerical values for the co-primary endpoint of absolute lean mass change in kilograms and does not detail intervention durations, specific participant demographics, or method-specific variances between DXA and MRI.

Cited by