Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Evidence synthesis · §3

Change in lean mass during pharmacologically induced weight reduction — included and excluded studies

The included-studies table with extracted data, the exclusions with reasons, and the risk-of-bias judgements.

Document identifier
CEI-ES-006/3
Series
Evidence synthesis
Version
3.0
Published
17 Jul 2024
Last reviewed
17 Mar 2025
Next review
17 Sep 2026
Identifier
10.71829/cei.syn.6
Certainty
Low
Cycle
2024 Q3
Review type
Scoping review
Search executed
12 Apr 2024

§3Included and excluded studies

Every study contributing to this review is listed below with the data extracted from it. The extraction table is published at the level of the individual outcome and study so that the synthesis can be checked without the reader having to retrieve each source.

§3.1Included studies

Table 4. Included studies with the characteristics extracted from each.

StudyDesignRandomisedDurationAnchor outcome as reportedYear
SURMOUNT-5TirzepatideRandomised, open-label, active-controlled75172 weeksMean change −20.2 % with tirzepatide versus −13.7 % with semaglutide2025
SURMOUNT-KOATirzepatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled68 weeksImprovement relative to placebo. The Institute records that pain improvement in a weight-loss trial cannot be attributed to a direct joint effect2025
SUMMITTirzepatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled731Median 104 weeksHazard ratio 0.62 (95 % CI 0.41 to 0.95) for the composite; clinical summary score difference 6.9 points (95 % CI 3.3 to 10.6)2024
SURMOUNT-4TirzepatideRandomised withdrawal67052 weeks after a 36-week open-label lead-inContinued treatment −5.5 % versus +14.0 % after switching to placebo2024
SURMOUNT-OSA-1TirzepatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled52 weeksSubstantial reduction in the apnoea–hypopnoea index relative to placebo; the Institute reproduces the pooled programme estimate rather than a per-trial figure2024
SURMOUNT-OSA-2TirzepatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled52 weeksDirectionally consistent with the companion trial2024
SELECTSemaglutideEvent-driven cardiovascular outcome trial17,604Mean 39.8 monthsHazard ratio 0.80 (95 % CI 0.72 to 0.90); 6.5 % versus 8.0 %2023
STEP-HFpEFSemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled52952 weeksClinical summary score improved 16.6 points versus 8.7 points with placebo; estimated difference 7.8 points (95 % CI 4.8 to 10.9)2023
SURMOUNT-2TirzepatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled93872 weeksMean change −14.7 % at 15 mg versus −3.2 % with placebo2023
SURMOUNT-3TirzepatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled80672 weeks after a 12-week lead-inAdditional mean change −18.4 % versus +2.5 % with placebo after the lead-in2023
STEP-5SemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled304104 weeksMean change −15.2 % versus −2.6 % with placebo; the longest randomised exposure in the programme2022
STEP-8SemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, active-controlled33868 weeksMean change −15.8 % with semaglutide versus −6.4 % with liraglutide; difference −9.4 percentage points (95 % CI −12.0 to −6.8)2022
SURMOUNT-1TirzepatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled2,53972 weeksMean change −20.9 % at 15 mg versus −3.1 % with placebo2022
STEP-1SemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled1,96168 weeksMean change −14.9 % with semaglutide 2.4 mg versus −2.4 % with placebo; treatment difference −12.4 percentage points (95 % CI −13.4 to −11.5)2021
STEP-2SemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled1,21068 weeksMean change −9.6 % with semaglutide 2.4 mg versus −3.4 % with placebo; the effect is attenuated relative to STEP 1, which the Institute records as a consistent…2021
STEP-3SemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled61168 weeksMean change −16.0 % with semaglutide 2.4 mg versus −5.7 % with placebo2021
STEP-4SemaglutideRandomised withdrawal80348 weeks after a 20-week run-inContinued treatment −7.9 % versus +6.9 % after switching to placebo; the Institute reads this as evidence that the effect is maintained by continued exposure…2021
17 included studies. Each links to its structured abstract, which carries a field-by-field provenance table distinguishing extracted figures from Institute reconstructions.

Contributing participants across studies reporting a randomised total: 29,795. Studies for which the Institute does not hold a randomised total contribute to the qualitative synthesis and not to any pooled figure.

§3.2Excluded at full text, with reasons

Table 5. Reports excluded at full text, by reason. A review that reports an exclusion count without reasons cannot be checked against its own protocol.

Reason for exclusionReports
Not a randomised comparison6
Population outside the review question14
Intervention outside the review question16
Comparator not eligible13
No eligible outcome reported8
Duplicate report of an included study12
Conference abstract without extractable data9
Retracted or subject to an expression of concern4
60 reports excluded at full text in total.

§3.3Risk of bias across included studies

Table 6. Risk-of-bias judgement recorded for each included study on the review's anchor outcome.

StudyRisk of biasInconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionPublication bias
SURMOUNT-5LowLowLowLowLow
SURMOUNT-KOALowLowLowLowHigh
SUMMITLowLowLowSomeLow
SURMOUNT-4LowLowLowLowLow
SURMOUNT-OSA-1LowLowLowLowLow
SURMOUNT-OSA-2LowLowLowLowLow
SELECTLowLowLowLowLow
STEP-HFpEFSomeLowLowLowLow
SURMOUNT-2LowLowLowLowLow
SURMOUNT-3LowLowLowLowLow
STEP-5LowLowLowLowLow
STEP-8LowLowLowLowLow
SURMOUNT-1LowLowLowLowLow
STEP-1LowLowLowLowLow
Judgements are the Institute's own and are recorded per outcome. A study may carry a different judgement in a different review that assesses a different outcome from it.
Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.