Dulaglutide in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular risk reduction: effect on the anchor outcome
In the population defined for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular risk reduction, what is the effect of Dulaglutide compared with the comparator used in its contributing trials on the anchor outcome for this indication?
Templated review frame. This review question was generated by crossing an indication with a compound for which contributing trials exist. Its prose frame is templated and is shared with other questions of the same shape. Its included studies, its summary of findings and its certainty rating are computed from the underlying records and are not templated. The Institute publishes these questions because the alternative is to leave a question the document set can answer unanswered, and it labels them because the alternative is to present a templated frame as an authored one.
§1Abstract
§1.1Review question
In the population defined for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular risk reduction, what is the effect of Dulaglutide compared with the comparator used in its contributing trials on the anchor outcome for this indication?
§1.2PICO frame
Table 1. The registered PICO frame. Any change made after protocol registration is recorded in the amendment log at §5 and is identified there as post hoc.
| Element | As registered |
|---|---|
| Population | Established atherosclerotic disease of the coronary, cerebral or peripheral arterial beds, or a risk profile sufficient for enrolment in a cardiovascular outcome trial. |
| Intervention | Dulaglutide administered as subcutaneous once weekly. |
| Comparator | The comparator used in each contributing trial, reported per trial rather than pooled across comparator types. |
| Outcomes | Anchor outcome for this indication: Three-point major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke). Additional outcomes: Cardiovascular death; All-cause death; Hospitalisation for heart failure. |
§1.3Method in brief
A review of the effects of an intervention on pre-specified outcomes, with a quantitative synthesis where the contributing studies are sufficiently similar. The protocol was registered with the Institute's secretariat before the search was executed. The search was run on 20 December 2025 across 8 sources and is reproduced in full at §2. Screening, extraction and certainty assessment were performed independently by two members of the secretariat with disagreement resolved by a third.[1,2]
§1.4Conclusion
High certainty evidence from 2 contributing trials bears on the effect of Dulaglutide on the anchor outcome for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular risk reduction. The estimate the Institute carries in the monograph is: MACE hazard ratio 0.88 in a population with a majority without established cardiovascular disease. The only large GLP-1 outcome trial enrolling a majority in primary prevention, which the Institute regards as an important distinguishing feature of this evidence base.
The conclusion rests on 2 contributing studies, listed with their extracted data at §3 and summarised outcome by outcome at §4.
§1.5Limitations
References cited on this page
References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.
- Gerstein HC, Colhoun HM, Dagenais GR, Diaz R, Lakshmanan M, Pais P, Probstfield J, Riesmeyer JS, Riddle MC, Rydén L, Xavier D, Atisso CM, Dyal L, Hall S, Rao-Melacini P, Wong G, Avezum A, Basile J, Chung N, Conget I. Dulaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes (REWIND): a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet 2019;394(10193):121–130. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31149-3 · PMID 31189511
- Pratley RE, Aroda VR, Lingvay I, Lüdemann J, Andreassen C, Navarria A, Viljoen A. Semaglutide versus dulaglutide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 7): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial. The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology 2018;6(4):275–286. doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(18)30024-X · PMID 29397376
Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.