Semaglutide is a GLP-1 receptor agonist. It helps regulate blood glucose by increasing insulin release and reducing glucagon when glucose is high. The cited Ozempic label covers type 2 diabetes and specific cardiovascular and kidney-risk indications. Uses depend on the branded product and patient population.[1.1]
One selected study: Randomized comparison of weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg with daily liraglutide 3.0 mg for weight loss, alongside diet and physical activity. 338 adults with overweight or obesity and no diabetes, followed for 68 weeks; the trial also included placebo groups. The primary comparison showed average weight loss of 15.8% with semaglutide versus 6.4% with liraglutide. For a confirmatory secondary outcome, 38.5% versus 6.0% lost at least 20%. Digestive adverse events occurred in 84.1% versus 82.7%. Treatment discontinuation for any reason was 13.5% versus 27.6%. The active-drug comparison was unblinded. Semaglutide allowed dose reduction for intolerance; liraglutide required stopping, with an option to restart.[2.1]
Studied methods, not dosing advice. Selected evidence, not a complete literature review or formal quality appraisal. Read the study summary
Source scope is listed with each reference. Prepared by PED Evidence with AI assistance. Independent clinician review has not been completed. Review standards
Evidence summarized on PED Evidence
67 completed summaries
43 human-study reports
31 randomized-trial candidates
19 safety-topic reports
These counts describe completed summaries on this site, not the size of the full literature. Publications can share participants; design labels are discovery metadata, not appraisals.
72 weeks; maximum tolerated semaglutide 1.7/2.4 mg versus tirzepatide 10/15 mg; adults without diabetes.
Demonstrated findings
Participants assigned semaglutide lost an average of 13.7% of body weight at 72 weeks, versus 20.2% with tirzepatide.
What might this mean? · interpretation
Semaglutide produced substantial weight reduction in this trial, with a smaller average reduction than the comparator.
What might this mean, and what would change the interpretation?
This result applies to the studied regimens and population. Weight change does not establish preservation of muscle or long-term cardiovascular benefit.
What would clarify this: Endpoint-specific comparisons using matched populations and durations.
Extensive human evidence · large randomized trials
Primary mechanism
GLP-1 receptor agonist
Reference profile available · Coverage varies by section
Also known as Ozempic · Wegovy · Rybelsus
What has been observed?
Selected source-linked reading notes, not the complete literature or a pooled conclusion.
Human · Reading scope not recorded
What did semaglutide achieve in the direct comparison?
72 weeks; maximum tolerated semaglutide 1.7/2.4 mg versus tirzepatide 10/15 mg; adults without diabetes.
Participants assigned semaglutide lost an average of 13.7% of body weight at 72 weeks, versus 20.2% with tirzepatide.
Limits: This result applies to the studied regimens and population. Weight change does not establish preservation of muscle or long-term cardiovascular benefit.
Mean weight reduction was 15.8% with semaglutide and 6.4% with liraglutide at 68 weeks.
Limits & adverse findings: Open-label comparison in adults without diabetes; other doses and outcomes need separate evidence. Gastrointestinal events were common in both groups.
The cited Ozempic label covers type 2 diabetes and specific cardiovascular and kidney-risk indications. Uses depend on the branded product and patient population. [1]
Known half-life
Approximately 1 week in the Ozempic injection label. This is a drug-elimination estimate, not the time until every effect stops. [1]
Half-life describes how quickly the measured drug concentration falls by half. It does not set a dosing interval.
Evidence & important limits
This profile uses the Ozempic label, not every semaglutide formulation. Important label warnings include gastrointestinal reactions, pancreatitis and thyroid C-cell tumors observed in rodents. [1]
Safety & evidence boundaries
Source-specific information, not a personal safety clearance or monitoring plan.
Label safety signals
The current Ozempic label lists gastrointestinal reactions, pancreatitis, diabetic-retinopathy complications, severe gastrointestinal reactions, gallbladder disease, kidney injury from fluid loss, hypersensitivity and aspiration risk around anesthesia. These are label warnings, not a personalized risk estimate.
Interactions, rare harms, long-term effects and reversibility require separate evidence. Do not infer they are absent when the sources here do not address them.
Identity, names & formulations
Canonical compound: Semaglutide · semaglutide
Searchable names: Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus
Names share a parent research page. Different esters, salts, routes and brands are not assumed to have the same half-life, indication or exposure.
Combination evidence stays attached to the studied combination. It is not automatically assigned to each ingredient.
Understand the evidence types
Read the model and design first, then the population, outcome and limitations. These categories describe evidence, not a best-compound ranking.
Randomized human trials
Compare assigned interventions. Randomization does not by itself establish low bias or relevance to every population.
Controlled human studies
Use a comparison group; allocation and confounding still matter.
Prospective human research
Follows participants forward. It may be observational or interventional, so this is not a separate quality grade.
Observational human research
Describes associations. Confounding can explain differences.
Case reports and series
Useful for unusual events and safety signals, not reliable rates or effect sizes.
Animal research
Can test biology and function in a living model. Human exposure, benefit and safety remain separate questions.
Cell and tissue research
Tests responses in a preparation, including human-derived cells. It is not a human participant trial.
Mechanistic and computational evidence
Helps explain or predict a pathway; predictions need experimental and clinical testing.
Anecdotal reports
Self-reported experiences can generate questions. Product identity, selection bias and other interventions may be uncontrolled.
Systematic reviews synthesize studies and depend on their quality. Preprint status and abstract versus full-paper reading are separate labels. Citation popularity measures attention, not reliability. A study summary is not a formal quality appraisal.
Reference facts checked 2026-09-16. Source scope is listed above; this is not a formal quality appraisal. See each label for full prescribing information.