Pairwise meta-analysis

Weight loss of 15 percent or more

Overweight or obesity without diabetes (adults)

weeks 20 to 40 (target week 26)Not stated by the trialsDoses of a drug pooledOdds ratio

Randomized trials

Treatments

275

Participants

Events

In plain language

Across 2 trials with 275 participants, 1 of 1 treatment had a clearly better result than placebo on weight loss of 15 percent or more. The most favorable estimate was for Mazdutide injection: odds ratio 25.65 (95% credible interval 4.28 to 363).

Higher values favor the treatment. "Clearly" means the 95% credible interval excludes no difference. These are averages across trials; they do not say how any one person will respond. Not medical advice.

Network of trials

Each circle is a treatment; each line joins treatments that were randomized against each other in at least one trial.

Node area shows participants; line width shows trials comparing two treatments directly. Blue: GLP-1 receptor agonist containing treatments; grey: comparators. Hover over or tab to a node or line for details.

Effects compared with Placebo

Odds ratio. Higher values favor the treatment.

Versus Placebo, log scale. Blue: Bayesian random effects posterior median with 95% credible interval (thick) and 95% prediction interval (dashed). Amber diamond: frequentist estimate with 95% confidence interval. Hover over or tab to a row for its values.

Effects of each treatment versus Placebo
Treatment	Bayesian OR (95% CrI)	95% prediction interval	Frequentist OR (95% CI)	Verdict
Mazdutide injection MAZD_SC	25.65 (4.28 to 363)	3.25 to 420		Better

Ranking

How likely each treatment is to be among the best. Rankings ignore the size of differences and their certainty, so read them with the effects above.

Heterogeneity, fit and convergence

Bayesian random effects (primary)

Heterogeneity (tau): 0.303 (95% CrI 0.072 to 1.287), log scale
Residual deviance: 3.8 for 4 data points
DIC: 5.8 (pD 2.0)
Largest R-hat: 1.001
Smallest ESS: bulk 2,632, tail 2,682
Divergent transitions: 0
Convergence: All criteria met
Priors: PR02 N(0, 5^2); PR05 N(0, 2.5^2); PR09 log normal(-2.29, 1.53^2) on tau^2 (General physical health indicators, pharm vs placebo control)

Inconsistency

Do trials comparing two treatments directly agree with the indirect evidence through other treatments?

No comparison here has both direct and indirect evidence, so inconsistency cannot be checked by node splitting.

Small study effects

A comparison adjusted funnel plot: each point is one trial comparison, centered on its own network estimate. Asymmetry can signal that small trials with unfavorable results are missing.

Fewer than ten trial comparisons, too few to judge funnel plot asymmetry.

Baseline characteristics of the trials

The baseline value of each effect modifier or prognostic factor that applies here, per trial: mean or percent over arms, weighted by the number randomized. A note under a value names a stand in (a median for a mean, 100 minus the male share, Asian subgroup rows, an all Asian site list); "not reported" means no source of the trial prints it.

Baseline effect modifiers and prognostic factors per trial
Trial	Baseline BMI or body weight (kg/m2) effect modifier, prognostic factor; 2 of 2	Type 2 diabetes share in weight trials (percent of participants) effect modifier; 2 of 2	Sex (percent female) effect modifier, prognostic factor; 2 of 2	Treatment duration (weeks) effect modifier; 2 of 2	Lifestyle co-intervention intensity (none standard intensive) effect modifier, prognostic factor; 2 of 2
NCT04904913 S001183	31.83	0 population codes	52.03	24	none
NCT05623839 S001559	32.5	0 population codes	50	20	none

Comparability of the trials

Checked across designs (the set of treatments each trial compares) for eligibility, outcome definition and assessment, and the baseline factors above. Flags point to possible intransitivity; notes describe variation that is not tied to design.

NoteOutcome assessment, time point: selected time points span 24 to 27 weeks
NoteOutcome assessment, analysis set: mixed: completers 1, modified_itt 1
NoteOutcome assessment, proportion method: mixed: not stated 1, not_stated 1
NoteData handling, input conversions: arms_combined 2, count_from_percent 2

Comparability items per trial
Trial	time weeks	analysis set	definition	instrument	adjudicated	proportion method	intercurrent events (discontinuation)	intercurrent events (rescue)	blinding	funding	start year	Eligibility
NCT04904913	24	modified_itt	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	not stated	double_blind	industry	2021	Chinese adults 18 to 75; BMI 28 or more, or 24 or more with comorbidity or hyperphagia; no diabetes, HbA1c below 6.5
NCT05623839	27	completers	not stated	not stated	not stated	not_stated	not stated	not stated	double_blind	industry	2022	age 18 to 70; BMI 27 to 50; HbA1c below 6.5 percent; no diabetes

Trial data

What each trial contributes. Arm rows give the arm value with its standard error, or events over participants; contrast rows give the odds ratio on the analysis scale (log) against the trial's first row. Flags mark converted, combined or approximated inputs.

Trial data entering this analysis
Trial	Arm	Treatment	Week	Data	Events / N	Flags	Source
NCT04904913	A1+A2+A3	MAZD_SC	24	arm, responders	32 / 186	arms_combined	R0016107:Table 2
NCT04904913	A4	PLACEBO	24	arm, responders	0 / 62		R0016107:Table 2
NCT05623839	A1	PLACEBO	27	arm, responders	0 / 6	count_from_percent	R0013210:Figure 2
NCT05623839	A2+A3	MAZD_SC	27	arm, responders	9 / 21	count_from_percent;arms_combined	R0013210:Figure 2

Rerun this analysis yourself

Remove treatments or trials and refit the frequentist and Bayesian models in your browser, with the same methods as the published analysis.

Open in the NMA lab