Semaglutide-associated risk of nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
- Design
- Meta-analysis · Hard outcome
- Match to healthy normal-weight adults aged 55–75
- Different populationDiabetes populations; absolute risk estimate is the useful quantity for any user.
- Could weight loss explain it?
- Unknown[Auto] Harm signal; weight-loss mediation not the relevant question, but consider whether harms relate to rapid weight loss or reduced intake.
- Study tier
- Study tier 3Consistent observational association with very low absolute risk; causality unproven.
- Assessment
- Version 2 · curated · Sep 13, 2026
Study facts come from the paper. Population match, weight-loss explanation and study tier are our judgments, made against the reference group of healthy normal-weight adults aged 55–75.
Combining five observational studies in people with type 2 diabetes, semaglutide roughly doubled the hazard of NAION, a rare cause of sudden, usually permanent vision loss, equating to about one extra case per 7,000 people treated per year. The authors note this is consistent with regulatory communications.
01Findings
What the study reported
- Drugs
- Semaglutide
- Primary outcome
- NAION in observational studies of semaglutide vs other glucose-lowering therapy in T2D
- Effect
- HR 2.17 (5 studies); vs SGLT2i HR 1.96; absolute risk 0.014%/year (~1 per 7,000 treated per year)
- 95% confidence interval
- 1.73 to 2.74
- P value
- <0.001
- Follow-up
- 12 years
- Adverse events
- Not extracted
- Limitations
- Auto-classified from abstract only; effect estimates, adverse events and limitations not extracted. Requires manual review.
Who was studied
- Age min
- 12
- Diabetes status
- type 2 diabetes
Study quality details
- Study design
- Meta-analysis
- Sample size
- not extracted
- Randomization
- n/a
- Blinding
- not stated
- Comparator
- not stated
- Follow up duration
- 12 years
- Outcome type
- hard
- Replication
- 5 studies consistent
- Consistency with other evidence
- not assessed (auto)
- Population applicability
- INDIRECT
- Statistical precision
- CI reported: 95% confidence intervals (CIs
- Risk of bias
- observational, registry-based; outcome misclassification possible
- Funding conflicts
- unclear
- Peer review status
- yes
02Funding
Funding and conflicts
- Funding
- Not stated
- Industry funded
- Unclear
- Manufacturer
- Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim
- Sponsor role
- not reported in abstract
- Author conflicts
- Several authors report honoraria from Novo Nordisk, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Sanofi.
- Independent replication
- yes (multiple cohorts)
- Notes
- Authors declare relationships with the drug's manufacturer: Novo Nordisk
Funding is shown on every study and never used to score it.
03Claims
Claims this study bears on
- Semaglutide increases the risk of non-arteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy (NAION).Supports
Meta-analysis of 5 observational studies: HR 2.17; absolute risk 0.014%/year.
04Source
The source, as retrieved
Abstract
[BACKGROUND] Semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, is widely used for the management of type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Recent case reports have raised concerns about a potential association between semaglutide use and the development of nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), a rare but vision-threatening condition. We aimed to evaluate whether semaglutide use is associated with an increased risk of NAION in patients with T2DM. [METHODS AND FINDINGS] We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies comparing patients with T2DM aged ≥12 years treated with semaglutide to those receiving other glucose-lowering therapies. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from January 2023 to November 2025. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study design, population characteristics, and outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and ROBINS-I v.2. Certainty of the evidence was graded according to the GRADE framework. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effects models; sensitivity analyses included crude and subgroup HRs, and overlapping study replacement. Leave-one-out analysis was conducted to assess small-study effects and publication bias. Results were contextualized within other meta-analyses, systematic reviews, consensus statements, and regulatory communications on the topic. Five eligible observational studies met the inclusion criteria, and 7 additional studies were included in the sensitivity analysis. Semaglutide use was associated with a significantly increased hazard of NAION compared with nonsemaglutide glucose-lowering regimens (HR 2.17, 95% CI [1.73, 2.74]; p < 0.001), regimens excluding other GLP-1 receptor agonists (HR 2.13, 95% CI [1.60, 2.83]; p < 0.001), and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) users (HR 1.96, 95% CI [1.28, 2.99]; p = 0.002). Despite the increased relative risk, the absolute risk remained low at 0.014% (95% CI [0.005%, 0.023%]; p = 0.002), corresponding to approximately 1 additional case of NAION per 7,000 semaglutide-treated patients annually. The results were consistent with meta-analyses of observational studies and corroborated decisions presented in regulatory communications. Due to exclusive focus on retrospective, registry-based observational studies, the evidence synthesis was limited and could be biased by study-level outcome misclassification and confounding. [CONCLUSIONS] Our findings suggest a possible association between semaglutide use and an increased risk of NAION in patients with T2DM. Although the absolute risk is low, clinicians should be aware of this potential adverse event, particularly in individuals at increased baseline risk for optic neuropathies. While these findings support current recommendations to discontinue semaglutide in patients diagnosed with NAION, the certainty of the available evidence is low, underscoring the need for further high-quality studies to clarify this association.
Where this record came from
| Source | Retrieved | Identifier |
|---|---|---|
| pubmed | Sep 13, 2026 | 42166479 first ingestion |