GLP-1 receptor agonists for primary prevention of breast cancer in high-risk women: A real-world analysis of efficacy and safety.

10520 Background: Therapeutic options for breast cancer (BC) prevention for high-risk women remain limited, and not all eligible patients opt for endocrine therapy due to concerns related to adverse events (AEs). GLP1RAs are widely used for obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus; their role in BC primary prevention (PP) in high-risk women with obesity has not been evaluated. Methods: Using the TriNetX Global Network (150 million patients, 108 organizations), we analyzed de-identified records of high-risk women aged 18–90 years with a BMI ≥ 30 who had health care encounters between January 1, 2000, and January 1, 2025, identified via ICD-10 codes. High risk was defined as at least one of the following: genetic predisposition to BC, family history of BC, atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ, or dense breasts. Patients were grouped as having GLP1-RA use or no GLP-1RA use. Patients with a prior history of BC or use of endocrine therapy were excluded. GLP-1RA users were propensity score-matched 1:1 with non-users based on demographics, comorbidities, social determinants of health, lifestyle factors, BMI, HbA1c, and prior breast imaging. Incident BC served as the primary endpoint, with key AEs as secondary measures. Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to assess outcomes, which were further validated through subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Results: Among 80,480 high-risk women with a BMI ≥ 30, 46,581 were assigned to each cohort. Baseline demographics were balanced between cohorts (mean age: 46 years, 70% White, 21% Black). Median follow-up was 2,790 vs 2,630 days for GLP-1RA users and non-users, respectively. BC incidence was 2.95% in GLP-1RA users (1,164/39,495 cases) vs 3.01% in non-users (1,200/39,057 cases) (3.27 vs. 3.57 cases per 1,000 person-years; HR 0.844; 95% CI, 0.779–0.915). GLP-1RA users exhibited an increased risk of endometrial cancer (HR 1.273; 95% CI, 1.088–1.491) and osteoporosis (HR 1.124; 95% CI, 1.054–1.199). No significant association was observed for venous thromboembolism. Gastrointestinal AEs were significantly higher in the GLP-1RA cohort. Conclusions: GLP-1RA use was associated with a modest reduction in BC incidence among high-risk women with obesity in this real-world study. Prospective randomized trials are needed to validate these associations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2026-05-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.10520
Primary Topic
Cancer Risks and Factors
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

GLP-1 receptor agonists for primary prevention of breast cancer in high-risk women: A real-world analysis of efficacy and safety.

Arshi Syal, Saba Shaikh, Jonathan Dao, Virginia Kaklamani et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Cancer Risks and Factors
article

GLP-1 receptor agonists for primary prevention of breast cancer in high-risk women: A real-world analysis of efficacy and safety.

Arshi Syal, Saba Shaikh, Jonathan Dao, Virginia Kaklamani, Yajur Arya, Vanessa Velázquez, Nico-al Paolo Gotera, Colton Jones, Jonathan Gelfond, Marcela Mazo- Canola, Ariana N. Neely
article en

Abstract

10520 Background: Therapeutic options for breast cancer (BC) prevention for high-risk women remain limited, and not all eligible patients opt for endocrine therapy due to concerns related to adverse events (AEs). GLP1RAs are widely used for obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus; their role in BC primary prevention (PP) in high-risk women with obesity has not been evaluated. Methods: Using the TriNetX Global Network (150 million patients, 108 organizations), we analyzed de-identified records of high-risk women aged 18–90 years with a BMI ≥ 30 who had health care encounters between January 1, 2000, and January 1, 2025, identified via ICD-10 codes. High risk was defined as at least one of the following: genetic predisposition to BC, family history of BC, atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ, or dense breasts. Patients were grouped as having GLP1-RA use or no GLP-1RA use. Patients with a prior history of BC or use of endocrine therapy were excluded. GLP-1RA users were propensity score-matched 1:1 with non-users based on demographics, comorbidities, social determinants of health, lifestyle factors, BMI, HbA1c, and prior breast imaging. Incident BC served as the primary endpoint, with key AEs as secondary measures. Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to assess outcomes, which were further validated through subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Results: Among 80,480 high-risk women with a BMI ≥ 30, 46,581 were assigned to each cohort. Baseline demographics were balanced between cohorts (mean age: 46 years, 70% White, 21% Black). Median follow-up was 2,790 vs 2,630 days for GLP-1RA users and non-users, respectively. BC incidence was 2.95% in GLP-1RA users (1,164/39,495 cases) vs 3.01% in non-users (1,200/39,057 cases) (3.27 vs. 3.57 cases per 1,000 person-years; HR 0.844; 95% CI, 0.779–0.915). GLP-1RA users exhibited an increased risk of endometrial cancer (HR 1.273; 95% CI, 1.088–1.491) and osteoporosis (HR 1.124; 95% CI, 1.054–1.199). No significant association was observed for venous thromboembolism. Gastrointestinal AEs were significantly higher in the GLP-1RA cohort. Conclusions: GLP-1RA use was associated with a modest reduction in BC incidence among high-risk women with obesity in this real-world study. Prospective randomized trials are needed to validate these associations.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 44(16_suppl)
Texas Tech University (US), Mercy Medical Center (US), The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US), Jacksonville College (US), WinnMed (US), Mercy Medical Center North Iowa (US), Mayo Clinic in Florida (US), Jefferson Hospital (US), The University of Texas Health Science Center (US), Mays Cancer Center at UT Health San Antonio (US), The University of Texas at San Antonio (US), The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US), Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Cancer Risks and Factors
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.