TOPLINE:

An analysis of FDA adverse event (AE) data showed that cutaneous AEs were uncommon with GLP-1 RAs, although rates varied across agents.

METHODOLOGY:

• Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data between 2018 and 2024 for semaglutide, liraglutide, exenatide, and dulaglutide.
• Cutaneous AEs were identified using MedDRA‑coded terms such as rash, pruritus, urticaria, alopecia, angioedema and compared with reports for DPP‑4 inhibitors (sitagliptin, saxagliptin, linagliptin, alogliptin).
• Other outcomes were distribution of specific AE types and the likelihood of reporting cutaneous AEs, with dulaglutide as reference drug.

TAKEAWAY:

• Of 129,330 total AEs reported for GLP-1 RAs, 7434 were cutaneous, representing 5.75% of reports, in patients with a mean age of about 60 years.
• Cutaneous AEs were less commonly reported with GLP-1 RAs than with DPP-4 inhibitors (proportional reporting ratio, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.257-0.284).
• Semaglutide showed the highest rate of cutaneous AE (8.16%), whereas dulaglutide had the lowest (3.75%), despite reporting the most total number of AEs (59,247).
• Rash, pruritus, alopecia, and hyperhidrosis were the most common cutaneous reactions for semaglutide, liraglutide, and dulaglutide, whereas exenatide was more often associated with urticaria and erythema. Rash and pruritus were reported for all four.
• Compared to dulaglutide, exenatide was associated with increased odds for cutaneous AEs (odds ratio [OR], 5.01), but semaglutide (OR, 0.404) and liraglutide (OR, 0.355) were associated with decreased odds.

IN PRACTICE:

“Cutaneous AEs from GLP-1 RAs are uncommon but notable” and are “often underreported in trials,” the authors wrote. “Dermatologists can recognize these patterns as they care for an increasing number of patients who are prescribed these medications in practice, indicating a need for improved monitoring and counseling,” they added.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Marisa Fat, Anne Burnett Marion School of Medicine at Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Texas, and was published online on January 1 in the Journal of Drugs in Dermatology.

LIMITATIONS:

The FAERS database used in this study is a passive reporting system subject to underreporting. The presence of an AE report did not necessarily imply that the selected drug caused that same AE. Additionally, prior medical history for each patient was limited, and the database might not have captured the entire clinical context of each AE.

DISCLOSURES:

No funding information was provided in the study, and the authors reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.