Can the same or a different GLP1 agent be used in a patient after they developed gallstone pancreatitis on Mounjaro?

Comment by InpharmD Researcher

Available evidence does not provide a specific directive on restarting Mounjaro (tirzepatide) or switching to another GLP-1 receptor agonist after gallstone pancreatitis attributed to tirzepatide. Prescribing information for GLP-1 receptor agonists states that therapy should be discontinued if pancreatitis is suspected and should not be restarted if pancreatitis is confirmed, and that gallbladder studies are indicated when cholelithiasis or cholecystitis is suspected. However, clinical data in patients with prior pancreatitis are mixed: several retrospective analyses and the LEADER trial did not show an increased recurrence signal with GLP-1 receptor agonists, whereas one retrospective cohort reported increased recurrent pancreatitis risk in high-risk patients. Based on available data, use of the same or a different GLP-1 receptor agonist may be considered only on an individualized basis after determining and addressing the pancreatitis etiology, assessing whether gallstone-related risk factors remain active, discussing risks and benefits with the patient, and monitoring closely for recurrent pancreatic or biliary symptoms.

Background

As noted in a 2020 meta-analysis, clinical trials of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have historically excluded patients with a history of pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer. While GLP-1RAs are generally not reported to increase the risk of acute pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer for treatment of type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), whether these safety findings can be extrapolated to patients with prior pancreatitis remains uncertain. However, the LEADER study included such patients and did not find liraglutide, in particular, to serve as a cumulative risk factor for acute pancreatic adverse events in patients with prior history of acute pancreatitis (See Table 1). [1], [2]

A 2022 systematic review and meta-analysis analyzed 76 randomized control trials involving 103,371 patients to determine the risk of gallbladder and biliary diseases with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs). Biliary disease was defined as the presence of bile duct stone, bile duct obstruction, bile duct stenosis, biliary colic, biliary fistula, biliary cyst, or cholangitis. The pooled analysis indicates that treatment with GLP-1RAs was associated with a significantly increased risk of gallbladder or biliary diseases (risk ratio [RR] 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23 to 1.52) compared with controls. GLP-1 RAs were also associated with increased risks of cholelithiasis (RR 1.27; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.47), cholecystitis (RR 1.36; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.62), and biliary disease (RR 1.55; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.22) compared with controls. When examining the incidence of biliary disease stratified by GLP-1RA agent, liraglutide (RR 1.79; 95% CI, 1.45 to 2.25) and dulaglutide (RR 1.35; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.73) were associated with an increased risk. Additionally, higher doses of subcutaneous semaglutide (≥1.0 mg) were associated with increased gallbladder or biliary diseases (RR 1.58; 95% CI 1.13 to 2.22). However, it should be noted that the studies were not powered for the subgroup analyses performed in the meta-analysis. [3]

A 2022 commentary provided clinical recommendations for managing the gastrointestinal (GI) side effects associated with GLP-1RAs in patients with overweight or obesity. Drawing on both published evidence and collective clinical expertise, the article emphasized that nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and constipation are the most frequently reported adverse events with GLP-1RAs, often occurring during initiation and dose escalation. A stepwise approach for managing these side effects was proposed, encapsulated by the "three E’s": education and explanation, escalation to an appropriate dose, and effective management of GI symptoms. If patients present with symptoms indicating pancreatitis, the authors suggest stopping the GLP-1RA and initiating appropriate management for suspected pancreatitis. They recommend against restarting the GLP-1RA if pancreatitis is confirmed and suggest appropriate gallbladder studies and clinical follow-up if cholelithiasis is suspected. [4]

A 2024 case series analyzed 39 patients to characterize and evaluate acute pancreatitis (AP) associated with different GLP-1RAs. Using the Naranjo scale (N= 39), 33 cases (84.6%) were deemed to have a probable causal relationship between GLP-1 RAs and AP, while 4 cases (10.3%) were classified as possible. Two cases involved cholelithiasis; however, none of the patients from the case series were rechallenged with GLP-1RAs due to safety concerns. [5]

A 2025 Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine review concluded that, although early GLP-1 receptor agonist trials raised concern for a slight increase in acute pancreatitis, more recent large meta-analyses do not support a class-wide pancreatitis risk, and FDA labels warn to discontinue therapy if pancreatitis is suspected but do not directly contraindicate GLP-1 receptor agonist use in patients with a prior history of pancreatitis. The review does not provide a specific directive on restarting tirzepatide/Mounjaro or switching to another GLP-1 agent after gallstone pancreatitis; however, it states that in patients with prior pancreatitis, the etiology of the prior episode should be determined and preventable or reversible causes should be corrected, noting that gallstones resolved by cholecystectomy may no longer represent an ongoing risk factor. In a retrospective review of 161 patients with prior pancreatitis who subsequently received GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy, 16 patients (10%) developed recurrent acute pancreatitis, with 6 cases clinically attributed to the GLP-1 receptor agonist and the remainder attributed to other causes or idiopathic. The authors recommend screening for pancreatitis risk factors before GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy, discussing cholecystectomy or ursodeoxycholic acid in patients with established gallbladder disease, counseling patients on risks and benefits, regulating the rate of weight loss through dose adjustment and meal content/frequency, and monitoring closely for symptoms or signs of pancreatitis during treatment. [6]

A 2025 review article examined the potential association between GLP-1RAs and gallbladder disease, highlighting several proposed mechanisms including suppression of cholecystokinin (CCK), alterations in bile acid receptor signaling (FXR and TGR5), and changes in gut-brain pathways that may impair gallbladder motility, promote bile stasis, and increase gallstone formation. While GLP-1RAs are effective for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity, systematic reviews and meta-analyses cited in the article suggest an increased relative risk of gallbladder-related events, particularly with higher doses, longer treatment durations, and substantial weight loss. The review noted that established risk factors for gallbladder disease—including female sex, advanced age, obesity, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes mellitus, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), rapid weight loss, high-fat diets, low fiber intake, physical inactivity, prior gallbladder disease, and genetic predisposition—may further increase susceptibility in patients receiving GLP-1RAs. To mitigate risk, the authors recommend individualized risk stratification, patient education regarding symptoms of biliary disease, gradual weight loss, healthy dietary and lifestyle practices, and closer monitoring of patients with multiple risk factors. High-risk patients, particularly those with type 2 diabetes mellitus, MASLD, rapid weight loss, or a history of gallbladder disease, may require periodic biochemical and imaging follow-up, with consideration of prophylactic ursodeoxycholic acid to reduce the risk of gallstone formation. In symptomatic patients, prompt evaluation with liver function testing and gallbladder imaging is advised, and a multidisciplinary approach may help optimize the metabolic benefits of GLP-1RA therapy while minimizing gallbladder-related complications. [7]

References: [1] Cao C, Yang S, Zhou Z. GLP-1 receptor agonists and pancreatic safety concerns in type 2 diabetic patients: data from cardiovascular outcome trials. Endocrine. 2020;68(3):518-525. doi:10.1007/s12020-020-02223-6
[2] Murphy CF, le Roux CW. Can we exonerate GLP-1 receptor agonists from blame for adverse pancreatic events?. Ann Transl Med. 2018;6(10):186. doi:10.21037/atm.2018.03.06
[3] He L, Wang J, Ping F, et al. Association of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Use With Risk of Gallbladder and Biliary Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Intern Med. 2022;182(5):513–519. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.0338
[4] Wharton S, Davies M, Dicker D, et al. Managing the gastrointestinal side effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists in obesity: recommendations for clinical practice. Postgrad Med. 2022;134(1):14-19. doi:10.1080/00325481.2021.2002616
[5] Guo H, Guo Q, Li Z, Wang Z. Association between different GLP-1 receptor agonists and acute pancreatitis: case series and real-world pharmacovigilance analysis. Front Pharmacol. 2024;15:1461398. Published 2024 Nov 13. doi:10.3389/fphar.2024.1461398
[6] Mehta AE, Lomeli LD, Pantalone KM. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and pancreatitis: A reconcilable divorce. Cleve Clin J Med. 2025;92(8):483-489. Published 2025 Aug 1. doi:10.3949/ccjm.92a.24113
[7] Ramírez-Mejía MM, Ponciano-Rodriguez G, Eslam M, Méndez-Sánchez N. GLP-1 receptor agonists and gallbladder disease risk: insights into molecular mechanisms and clinical implications. Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 2025;16:20420188251406456. Published 2025 Dec 23. doi:10.1177/20420188251406456
Relevant Prescribing Information

WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS [8], [9], [10], [11]
Pancreatitis: Has been reported in clinical trials. Discontinue promptly if pancreatitis is suspected. Do not restart if pancreatitis is confirmed.
Acute Gallbladder Disease: If cholelithiasis or cholecystitis are suspected, gallbladder studies are indicated.

References: [8] Ozempic (semaglutide) injection, for subcutaneous use. Prescribing information. Plainsboro, NJ: Novo Nordisk Inc; Revised November 2023.
[9] Saxenda (liraglutide [rDNA origin] injection), for subcutaneous use. Prescribing information. Plainsboro, NJ: Novo Nordisk Inc; Revised December 2020.
[10] Trulicity (dulaglutide) injection, for subcutaneous use. Prescribing information. Indianapolis, IN: Eli Lilly and Company; Revised November 2024.
[11] Zepbound (tirzepatide) injection, for subcutaneous use. Prescribing information. Indianapolis, IN: Eli Lilly and Company; Revised December 2024.
Literature Review

A search of the published medical literature revealed 6 studies investigating the researchable question:

Can the same or a different GLP1 agent be used in a patient after they developed gallstone pancreatitis on Mounjaro?

Level of evidence

C - Multiple studies with limitations or conflicting results  Read more→



Please see Tables 1-6 for your response.


Decreased risk of recurrent acute pancreatitis with semaglutide and tirzepatide in people with type 2 diabetes or obesity with a history of acute pancreatitis: A propensity matched global federated TriNetX database-based retrospective cohort study

Design

Retrospective cohort study

N= 258,238

Objective

To evaluate and compare the risk of recurrent acute pancreatitis among individuals with type 2 diabetes or obesity with a history of acute pancreatitis taking GLP-1 receptor agonists, particularly semaglutide and tirzepatide

Study Groups

Study cohort (N= 258,238)

Inclusion Criteria

Patients aged 18 years and older with type 2 diabetes or obesity and a history of acute pancreatitis, identified through ICD-10-CM code K85

Exclusion Criteria

Patients who alternated between different GLP-1 RA medications or were concurrently taking dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i)

Methods

The study analyzed the recurrence of AP over a 5-year period, comparing different GLP-1 RA treatments. Patients were divided into two analyzed categories: category 1, comprised of subjects with a history of AP, and category 2, subjects with a history of AP after excluding known risk factors (e.g., alcohol-related disorders, cholelithiasis, tobacco use, and hypertriglyceridemia). Propensity score matching was used to account for potential confounders. Statistical analyses included z-tests, risk ratios, and odds ratios.

Duration

5-year follow-up

Outcome Measures

Recurrence of acute pancreatitis, comparative risk assessments among different GLP-1 RA treatments

Baseline Characteristics

Not provided

Results

Comparison

Cohort

Sample size after match

People with recurrent AP

Risk

Risk difference

95% confidence interval (CI)

p-value

GLP-1 RA vs. No GLP-1 RA (No risk factor)

GLP-1 RA 4,996 689 13.8% -0.271 -0.288 to -0.255 <0.001

Semaglutide vs. Exenatide

Semaglutide 159 16 10.1% -0.17 -0.253 to -0.086 <0.001

Semaglutide vs. Liraglutide

Semaglutide 874 95 10.9% -0.079 -0.112 to -0.046 <0.001

Semaglutide vs. Dulaglutide

Semaglutide 182 182 13.6% -0.018 -0.045 to 0.009 0.188

Semaglutide vs. Tirzepatide

Semaglutide 47 47 11.7% 0.055 0.015 to 0.094 0.007

Adverse Events

Not specifically reported

Study Author Conclusions

GLP-1 RAs, particularly semaglutide and tirzepatide, are associated with a reduced risk of recurrent acute pancreatitis in people with type 2 diabetes or obesity. Tirzepatide showed the lowest risk of recurrence, highlighting the importance of personalized treatment choices.

InpharmD Researcher Critique

Limitations include potential inaccuracies in electronic health records, lack of dose consideration, and possible selection bias due to data predominantly from affiliated institutions. Residual confounding may still exist despite propensity score matching.
References:
[1] [1] Nassar M, Nassar O, Abosheaishaa H, Misra A. Decreased risk of recurrent acute pancreatitis with semaglutide and tirzepatide in people with type 2 diabetes or obesity with a history of acute pancreatitis: A propensity matched global federated TriNetX database-based retrospective cohort study. Diabetes Metab Syndr. Published online September 19, 2024. doi:10.1016/j.dsx.2024.103116

The incidence of acute pancreatitis with GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy in individuals with a known history of pancreatitis

Design

Retrospective, observational, single-center, chart review

N= 161

Objective

To determine whether a higher frequency of acute pancreatitis (AP) is associated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) exposure in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and a prior history of AP

Study Groups

Study cohort (N= 161)

Inclusion Criteria

Adult patients, history of AP and a subsequent encounter diagnosis of acute pancreatitis (ICD-9/ ICD-10 codes), exposure to a GLP-1 RA

Exclusion Criteria

Not disclosed

Methods

Data were taken from the electronic health record (EHR) system at Cleveland Clinic for adults meeting inclusion criteria. Exposure was defined as a documented prescription for GLP-1 RAs. Patients were followed until the date of recurrent acute pancreatitis (RAP) or censoring of data.

Duration

2010 to 2019

Mean follow-up: 28.2 months

Outcome Measures

Development of AP

Baseline Characteristics

 

Study cohort (N= 161)

Age, years

54 ± 13

Female

82 (50.9%)

White

91 (56.5%)

Medical history

T2D

Hypertension

Obesity

Hyperlipidemia

 

153 (95%)*

139 (86.3%)

119 (73.9%)

129 (80.1%)

* Of the other 8 patients, 5 were treated for obesity, 2 were off-label for Type 1 diabetes, and 1 was unclear

Results

Endpoint

Study cohort (N= 161)

Development of RAP

9.9%

RAP attributed to GLP-1 RA exposure

6 (4%)

Adverse Events

N/A

Study Author Conclusions

While caution certainly needs to be exercised, and future studies are needed, this report would support the use of GLP-1RA in patients with a history of AP, on an individualized basis, particularly among patients where the etiology of the prior episode of AP has been treated and/or no longer exists and where a shared medical decision process between provider and patient has determined that the benefits are considered to outweigh the risks.

InpharmD Researcher Critique

Due to the retrospective nature of the study, data may be missing or inaccurate, such as reported prescriptions via the EHR. Report of RAP associated with GLP-1 RA exposure may have been impacted by confounding variables not adequately captured via clinical documentation, and conversely, RAP considered not associated with GLP-1 RA exposure and which were idiopathic in nature may have been due to GLP-1 RA use. History of acute pancreatitis prior to GLP-1 RA exposure was not documented.

References:
[1] [1] Lomeli LD, Kodali AM, Tsushima Y, Mehta AE, Pantalone KM. The incidence of acute pancreatitis with GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy in individuals with a known history of pancreatitis. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2024;215:111806. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2024.111806

Amylase, Lipase, and Acute Pancreatitis in People With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Liraglutide: Results From the LEADER Randomized Trial

Design

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center trial

N= 9,340

Objective

To evaluate serum amylase and lipase levels and the rate of acute pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk randomized to liraglutide or placebo and observed for 3.5–5.0 years

Study Groups

Liraglutide (n= 4,668)

Placebo (n= 4,672)

Inclusion Criteria

Type 2 diabetes and high risk for cardiovascular events

Exclusion Criteria

Type 1 diabetes; the use of GLP-1–receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, pramlintide, or rapid-acting insulin; a familial or personal history of multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 or medullary thyroid cancer; and the occurrence of an acute coronary or cerebrovascular event within 14 days before screening and randomization

Methods

Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to either subcutaneous liraglutide 1.8 mg daily (or maximum tolerated doses) or placebo. Fasting serum lipase, amylase, and incident of pancreatitis were monitored. 

Duration

Treatment period: 3.5 to 5 years

Median observation time: 3.84 years

Follow-up period: 30 day

Outcome Measures

Primary composite outcome: first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke

Secondary: acute pancreatitis

Baseline Characteristics

 

Liraglutide (n=4,668)

Placebo (n=4,672)

Age, years

64.2 64.4

Male

64.5% 64.0% 

Diabetes duration, years

12.8 + 8.0 12.9 + 8.1

Glycated hemoglobin, %

8.7 + 1.6 8.7 + 1.5

Patient with a history of previous pancreatitis 

147 120

Results

Endpoint

Liraglutide (n=4,668)

Placebo (N=4,672)

Primary composite outcome

608 (13.0%)

694 (14.9%)

Acute pancreatitis events a

Patients with a history of previous pancreatitis 

18 (0.4%)

2/147 (1.4%)

23 (0.5%)

6/120 (5.05)

Chronic pancreatitis

0 2 (0.04%)

Severity of acute pancreatitis

Mild

Moderate

Severe

Hospitalization 

 

16/18 (88.95)

0

2/18 (11.1%)

17/18 (94.4%)

 

21/23 (91.3%)

3/23 (13.0%)

1/23 (4.3%)

19/23 (82.6%)

Gallstone disease

7/18 (38.9%)

10/23 (43.5%)

Predictive value of increased lipase or amylase levels for confirmed acute pancreatitis

Lipase > ULN during trial b

Subsequent acute pancreatitis

2,604

7 (0.27%)

1,682

11 (0.65%)

Lipase ≥33 ULN during trial

Subsequent acute pancreatitis

339

0

216

2(0.93%)

Amylase >ULN during trial

Subsequent acute pancreatitis

1,382

3 (0.22%)

1,084

5 (0.46%)

Amylase ≥33 ULN during trial

Subsequent acute pancreatitis

38

0

35

0

In both groups, most cases of acute pancreatitis developed >12 months after beginning the trial. 

Compared with the placebo group, liraglutide-treated patients had increases in serum lipase and amylase of 28.0% and 7.0%, respectively. Levels were increased at 6 months and then remained stable.

Adverse Events

See results. 

Study Author Conclusions

In a population with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, there were numerically fewer events of acute pancreatitis among liraglutide-treated patients (regardless of previous history of pancreatitis) compared with the placebo group. Liraglutide was associated with increases in serum lipase and amylase, which were not predictive of an event of subsequent acute pancreatitis.

InpharmD Researcher Critique

The population of the trial included patients with type 2 diabetes, the majority being men, with a higher mean age and longer diabetes duration. Therefore, the findings may not be generalizable to other patient populations. Furthermore, since only a small number of patients with a previous history of pancreatitis were included, the recurrent risk cannot be completely ruled out. 

References:
[1] [1] Steinberg WM, Buse JB, Ghorbani MLM, et al. Amylase, Lipase, and Acute Pancreatitis in People With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Liraglutide: Results From the LEADER Randomized Trial. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(7):966-972. doi:10.2337/dc16-2747
Glucagon‐Like Peptide‐1 Analogues and the Risk of Recurrent Pancreatitis in Diabetic Patients With History of Pancreatitis or Elevated Lipase: Retrospective Cohort Analysis
Design

Retrospective cohort study

N= 46,186

Objective To assess the link between GLP1 analogues and the risk of recurrent pancreatitis in high-risk patients with a history of pancreatitis or elevated lipase enzyme
Study Groups

Pancreatitis (n= 10,933)

Elevated lipase (n= 35,253)

Inclusion Criteria Adults with diabetes who experienced pancreatitis or had elevated lipase (> 1.5 times the upper reference limit) between January 1, 2012 and March 3, 2024
Exclusion Criteria Patients who had used GLP1 analogues prior to or within 1 month of the index date
Methods Retrospective data from a large health maintenance organisation were extracted using the MDClone data-sharing platform. GLP1 analogues were initiated in a portion of the cohort during the follow-up period. Survival and multivariate analyses, including time-varying models, were performed to assess the impact of GLP1 analogues on recurrent pancreatitis risk
Duration January 1, 2012 to March 3, 2024
Outcome Measures Primary: Recurrent pancreatitis
Baseline Characteristics   No GLP1 agonists (n= 22,915) GLP1 agonists (n= 6133)
Age at first pancreatitis, years 68.4 (59.2–76.4) 63.3 (55.5–70.3)
Male 12,565 (55%) 3476 (57%)
BMI, mg/kg2 27.5 (24.5–31.2) 30.8 (27.7–34.5)
Haemoglobin A1c, % 6.4 (5.9–7.3) 7.3 (6.5–8.6)
Triglycerides, mg/dL 132 (96–187) 157 (112–223)
eGFR, mL/min/1.73 m2 79 (56–95) 85 (59–99)
Smoking 8947 (39%) 2630 (43%)
Alcohol 1209 (5%) 310 (5%)
Pancreatitis on index 6126 (27%) 1302 (21%)
History of > 1 pancreatic event 2955 (13%) 635 (10%)
Drugs associated with risk of pancreatitis 20,603 (90%) 5786 (94%)
Results   No pancreatitis (n= 19,301) Pancreatitis (n= 15,649) Hazard ratio (95% CI)
Age at first pancreatitis, years 67.6 (58.4–75.3) 69.7 (60.8–78.1) 0.994 (0.993–0.995)
Male 10,384 (54%) 9051 (58%) 1.150 (1.114–1.187)
BMI, mg/kg2 28.2 (25.0–32.0) 27.8 (24.7–31.6) 0.996 (0.994–0.999)
Haemoglobin A1c, % 6.5 (6.0–7.5) 6.6 (6.0–7.7) 1.014 (1.004–1.024)
Triglycerides, mg/dL 134 (97–191) 138 (99–197) 1.146 (1.114–1.179)
eGFR, mL/min/1.73 m2 81 (58–96) 68 (40–90) 0.996 (0.996–0.997)
Smoking 7418 (38%) 6288 (40%) 1.160 (1.123–1.197)
Alcohol 852 (4%) 1257 (8%) 1.437 (1.357–1.522)
Pancreatitis on index 4457 (23%) 4211 (27%) 1.225 (1.181–1.270)
History of > 1 pancreatic event 1703 (9%) 3737 (24%) 1.820 (1.755–1.888)
Drugs associated with risk of pancreatitis 17,050 (88%) 15,000 (95%) 1.859 (1.716–2.014)
Adverse Events An increased risk of recurrent pancreatitis was observed in high-risk patients receiving GLP1 analogue therapy. GLP1 analogue use was an independent risk factor for recurrent pancreatitis in a time-varying analysis (HR 1.252, 95% CI 1.178–1.332)
Study Author Conclusions An increased risk of recurrent pancreatitis was observed in high-risk patients receiving GLP1 analogue therapy. These findings align with pharmacovigilance data and support caution when prescribing GLP1 analogues in this population. Prospective studies are warranted to further evaluate this association
Critique The study provides valuable insights into the risk of recurrent pancreatitis associated with GLP1 analogues in high-risk patients. However, the retrospective design may introduce biases such as selection bias and confounding by indication. The lack of imaging data and the inability to confirm pancreatitis diagnosis in some cases are limitations. Additionally, the study's reliance on baseline covariates without accounting for changes over time may underestimate confounding effects. Despite these limitations, the study highlights the need for cautious prescribing of GLP1 analogues in high-risk populations and suggests the need for further prospective research
References:
[1] [1] Calvarysky B, Gal Y, Kushnir S, et al. Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Analogues and the Risk of Recurrent Pancreatitis in Diabetic Patients With History of Pancreatitis or Elevated Lipase: Retrospective Cohort Analysis. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2026;42(1):e70116. doi:10.1002/dmrr.70116

GLP-1 Agonist Use in a Patient With an Explainable Cause of Pancreatitis

Design

Case report

Case presentation

A 51-year-old Caucasian male with a history of diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia presented to the emergency department (ED) with back pain, abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. Tests showed that he had pancreatitis caused by high levels of triglycerides. He did not have gallstones or a history of alcohol abuse. After being discharged, he was treated with a combination of anti-lipidemia therapy and a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist (exenatide extended-release 2 mg SubQ weekly) for his diabetes. He did not experience another episode of pancreatitis during one year of follow-up.

Study Author Conclusions

This case report illustrates the point that the use of a GLP-1 receptor agonist is not absolutely contraindicated in patients with diabetes and a history of pancreatitis. The rare incidence and uncertain causality of pancreatitis associated with GLP-1 receptor agonist use should not automatically preclude the consideration of these agents in a patient with a history of pancreatitis. As seen in this case, healthcare providers may consider GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy for patients with a history of pancreatitis originating from a known cause that has been adequately managed. We recommend that the risks and benefits of therapy be considered and discussed with such patients and that as a precaution, vigilant monitoring for pancreatitis recurrence be conducted in patients subsequently receiving GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy.

References:
[1] Brady SM, Kane MP, Busch RS. Glp-1 agonist use in a patient with an explainable cause of pancreatitis. AACE Clinical Case Reports. 2016;2(2):e82-e85. doi:10.4158/EP15658.CR

Use of Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in People with History of Acute Pancreatitis: TriNetX Analysis

Design

Retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX platform

N= 672,069

Objective

To evaluate the risk of recurrence of acute pancreatitis in subjects on GLP-1RAs with a history of acute pancreatitis

Study Groups

Category IA: GLP-1RA vs SGLT2i (n= 5,077 vs 5,077 after matching)

Category IB: GLP-1RA vs DPP-4i (n= 3,835 vs 3,835 after matching)

Category IIA, T2D: GLP-1RA vs SGLT2i (n= 4,252 vs 4,252 after matching)

Category IIB, T2D: GLP-1RA vs DPP-4i (n=3,439 vs 3,439 after matching)

Inclusion Criteria

Patients aged 18 and older with a history of acute pancreatitis, identified by ICD-10-CM code K85 in their electronic medical record

Exclusion Criteria

Subjects in GLP-1RA group were not on SGLT2i or DPP-4i, those in the SGLT2i group were not on GLP-1RA or DPP-4i, and in the DPP-4i group, subjects were not on GLP-1RAs or SGLT2i

Methods

The authors used TriNetX electronic medical record data collected on June 23, 2024, from approximately 148 million patients across 123 healthcare organizations. Patients with AP history were identified by ICD-10-CM code K85. Medication exposure was based on initiation of GLP-1RA, SGLT2i, or DPP-4i, which served as the index event. GLP-1RAs included semaglutide, liraglutide, exenatide, dulaglutide, lixisenatide, and albiglutide; tirzepatide/Mounjaro was not listed among included GLP-1RA agents. SGLT2i and DPP-4i were used as active comparator groups. Propensity score matching adjusted for age, sex, BMI, hemoglobin A1c, triglycerides, cholelithiasis, tobacco use, alcohol abuse, and alcohol dependence. Recurrent AP was assessed at 1, 3, and 5 years after medication initiation. The study addressed recurrent AP broadly; it did not specifically evaluate gallstone pancreatitis after tirzepatide.

Duration

Data collected on June 23, 2024

Outcome Measures

Primary: Risk of recurrence of acute pancreatitis

Secondary: Risk differences between GLP-1RAs, SGLT2i, and DPP-4i over 1, 3, and 5 years

Baseline Characteristics

After propensity score matching in the T2D cohorts, baseline characteristics were generally well balanced between GLP-1RA users and comparator groups for age, sex, alcohol abuse/dependence, cholelithiasis, tobacco use, triglycerides, and most HbA1c/BMI categories.

In the GLP-1RA versus SGLT2i cohort, mean age was 57.2 years in both groups, female sex was 52.8% versus 53.7%, cholelithiasis was present in 15.5% versus 14.7%, and mean HbA1c was 8.0% versus 8.1%, respectively.

Mean BMI remained statistically higher in the GLP-1RA group compared with SGLT2i users (35.2 vs 34.1 kg/m²).

In the GLP-1RA versus DPP-4i cohort, mean age was 58.8 versus 58.4 years, female sex was 53.6% versus 52.7%, cholelithiasis was 15.5% versus 14.9%, and triglycerides were 216.0 versus 214.6 mg/dL, respectively.

Mean HbA1c and BMI remained higher in the GLP-1RA cohort compared with DPP-4i users (HbA1c 8.0% vs 7.8%; BMI 34.2 vs 32.4 kg/m²).

Race was not disclosed.

Results

Among patients with T2D and a history of acute pancreatitis, GLP-1RA use was associated with a consistently lower risk of recurrent acute pancreatitis compared with both active comparator groups across 1-, 3-, and 5-year follow-up.

Compared with SGLT2i users, recurrent acute pancreatitis occurred in 533/4,252 GLP-1RA users versus 811/4,252 SGLT2i users at 1 year (risk 0.125 vs 0.191; risk difference -0.065; p< 0.001), 672 versus 997 patients at 3 years (risk 0.158 vs 0.234; risk difference -0.076; p< 0.001), and 702 versus 1,032 patients at 5 years (risk 0.165 vs 0.243; risk difference -0.078; p< 0.001).

Compared with DPP-4i users, recurrent acute pancreatitis occurred in 424/3,439 GLP-1RA users versus 585/3,439 DPP-4i users at 1 year (risk 0.123 vs 0.170; risk difference -0.047; p< 0.001), 538 versus 753 patients at 3 years (risk 0.156 vs 0.219; risk difference -0.063; p< 0.001), and 563 versus 794 patients at 5 years (risk 0.164 vs 0.231; risk difference -0.067; p< 0.001).

Adverse Events

No specific adverse events reported in the study

Study Author Conclusions

Our retrospective analysis of a large database is the first observation in subjects who have a history of AP to suggest that GLP-1RAs are safe and can be used in subjects with a history of pancreatitis. While our analysis shows that there was a significantly lower risk of AP recurrence in subjects on GLP-1RAs compared to DPP-IV inhibitors and SGLT2 inhibitors, as this is a retrospective analysis we conclude that these findings need to be confirmed in prospective studies.

Critique

This large real-world, propensity-matched analysis is directly relevant to the general question of whether GLP-1RA therapy can be used after prior pancreatitis, and it found lower recurrent AP rates with GLP-1RAs than with SGLT2i or DPP-4i comparators over up to 5 years. However, it does not directly answer whether tirzepatide/Mounjaro can be restarted after gallstone pancreatitis, because tirzepatide was not included, AP etiology and severity were not well characterized, and residual confounding is possible despite matching.

References:
[1] [1] Nassar M, Abosheaishaa H, Misra A, Dandona P, Ghanim H, Chaudhuri A. Use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in people with history of acute pancreatitis: TriNetX analysis. Diabetes Metab. 2025;51(2):101613. doi:10.1016/j.diabet.2025.101613