GLP-1 Agonists in Adolescent Obesity: A Narrative Review of Single, Dual, and Triple Agonists.
GLP-1 receptor agonists like semaglutide have shown a 16% mean weight reduction in adolescents over 68 weeks, but caution is advised regarding long-term safety and efficacy.
Where it sits
this study against the rest of the mazdutide (ibi362) corpusSummary and findings
This narrative review evaluates the mechanisms, clinical efficacy, and safety of GLP-1 receptor agonists in managing adolescent obesity. It highlights findings from clinical trials, including the STEP TEENS trial, which reported a mean body weight reduction of approximately 16% over 68 weeks with semaglutide. The review emphasizes the need for caution regarding the long-term safety and efficacy of these treatments in pediatric populations.
Abstract
Adolescent obesity is an escalating global health concern associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and long-term metabolic complications. Although lifestyle interventions remain first-line therapy, their limited long-term effectiveness has led to increasing interest in pharmacological approaches. This narrative review evaluates the mechanisms, clinical efficacy, and safety of glucagon-like peptie-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, as well as emerging dual and triple incretin-based therapies, in the management of adolescent obesity. A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus, focusing on clinical trials, systematic reviews, and real-world studies published between 2010 and 2024. Evidence from pediatric and adolescent populations was prioritized, while adult data were included where adolescent-specific evidence remains unavailable and are interpreted cautiously. Among single-agent therapies, GLP-1 receptor agonists have demonstrated clinically meaningful weight reduction and metabolic benefits in adolescents. In the STEP TEENS trial, once-weekly semaglutide resulted in approximately 16% mean body weight reduction over 68 weeks, while liraglutide produced more modest reductions. Dual agonists such as tirzepatide and emerging triple agonists, including retatrutide, have shown superior weight-loss efficacy in adult populations; however, pediatric data for these agents remain limited or unavailable. Across all incretin-based therapies, gastrointestinal adverse effects are the most commonly reported side effects. In conclusion, GLP-1 receptor agonists represent an effective pharmacological option for adolescents with obesity, while dual and triple incretin agonists offer promising future therapeutic potential. Nevertheless, the clinical application of multi-receptor agonists in adolescents requires caution, as long-term safety, developmental outcomes, and real-world adherence data in pediatric populations are still lacking. Further well-designed pediatric trials are essential before broader adoption can be recommended.
Background
The paper addresses the increasing prevalence of obesity in adolescents and the potential role of GLP-1 agonists as a therapeutic option. Prior studies have suggested that these agents may aid in weight management, but their effectiveness and safety in younger populations remain under investigation. This review is significant as it compiles various studies to provide insights into the use of these medications in adolescents.
Methods
This is a narrative review that synthesizes findings from existing studies on GLP-1 agonists, including Mazdutide. The review does not specify a particular study design, population, or sample size, as it aggregates data from multiple sources. The focus is on summarizing the effects of single, dual, and triple agonist therapies without conducting original research.
Results
Not reported in abstract.
Interpretation
The review highlights the potential benefits of GLP-1 agonists in treating adolescent obesity, yet it lacks new data to substantiate claims. The clinical significance of findings from the aggregated studies may vary, and the review does not address potential confounding factors such as study design or population differences. Therefore, practitioners should approach the conclusions with caution.
Key findings
- Not reported in abstract.
Limitations
- Narrative review, no original data presented.
- Quality of included studies may vary.
- No specific sample size or population details provided.