Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Revista De Medicina Unc · October 29, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Introduction: Obesity is a multifactorial chronic condition associated with metabolic and cardiovascular comorbidities and reduced quality of life. Given the limitations of conventional approaches, GLP-1 receptor agonists and dual GIP/GLP-1 agonists have gained prominence in pharmacological treatment. Objective: To compare the efficacy, adherence, adverse effects, and systemic impacts of semaglutide and tirzepatide, in addition to weight reduction, in adults with obesity through an integrative literature review. Methods: A search was conducted in PubMed, BVS, LILACS, and Wiley Online Library, including publications from 2015 to 2025. Randomized clinical trials, cohort studies, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews directly comparing the two drugs were included. Results and Discussion: The analyzed studies demonstrated that tirzepatide is more effective than semaglutide in promoting weight loss, with reductions ranging from 11% to 19.2% of body weight, whereas semaglutide achieved reductions between 5.7% and 12.9%. Tirzepatide also provided greater improvements in metabolic markers, including insulin resistance, lipid profile, blood pressure, and abdominal circumference. Both medications presented similar safety profiles, with predominantly mild to moderate gastrointestinal adverse effects. Cost-effectiveness analyses indicated that tirzepatide offers better cost-benefit performance, particularly in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Conclusion: Although both drugs represent important advances in obesity pharmacotherapy, tirzepatide demonstrated superior clinical efficacy and metabolic benefits. However, factors such as cost, access, and individual patient characteristics should be considered in therapeutic decision-making. Long-term and nationally representative studies are recommended to assess the applicability of these findings within the Brazilian public health context.