Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Pregnancy exposure to GLP-1 and dual GLP-1/GIP receptor agonists shows no consistent increase in malformationsData shows no clear risk for babies and mothers using GLP-1

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that while no increased risk of malformations was found, evidence is too low-certainty to confirm safety.

This meta-analysis synthesized data regarding maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes for individuals exposed to GLP-1 receptor agonists and dual GLP-1/GIP receptor agonists during the preconception or gestational periods. The analysis specifically examined outcomes including major congenital malformations, preterm birth, stillbirth, and small-for-gestational-age birth.

For major congenital malformations, the analysis reported an OR of 0.99 (95% CI 0.77-1.27) for periconceptional/first-trimester exposure and an OR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.94-1.06) for pregnancy-period analysis. No statistically significant differences were found for preterm birth, stillbirth, or small-for-gestational-age birth. Additionally, signals for preeclampsia and renal or urinary issues were not independently replicated.

The authors note several significant limitations, including very low certainty for all key outcomes, imprecision, and residual confounding. The data were further limited by heterogeneous comparators, sparse agent-specific data, and uncertain exposure timing. Consequently, these findings are insufficient to establish the safety of these agents during pregnancy, and clinical conclusions regarding safety are precluded.

How this fits prior evidence

This meta-analysis extends the previous finding that GLP-1 receptor agonists in pregnancy show no clear increase in most adverse outcomes. While this study specifically includes dual GLP-1/GIP receptor agonists and confirms the lack of a consistent increase in malformations (OR 0.99 and 1.00), the evidence remains of very low certainty. The findings reinforce that safety is not yet established for these agents in pregnant populations.

When a person is considering a new medication during pregnancy, the biggest concern is always the safety of the baby. Some people use GLP-1 medications, which are often used for weight management and blood sugar control. This review looked at how these drugs might affect mothers and their babies.

The analysis found no clear or consistent increase in risk for major birth defects, even when looking at exposure before conception or during the first trimester. Additionally, the data showed no statistically significant differences for other common concerns, such as preterm births, babies being born too small for their age, or stillbirths.

While these results are encouraging, it is important to know that the evidence is currently very weak. Because the data is sparse and the timing of when people took the drugs was not always clear, the researchers could not reach a firm conclusion on safety. Because of these uncertainties, you should always talk to your doctor before making any changes to your treatment plan.

What this means for you:
No clear link was found between GLP-1 drugs and birth defects, but the evidence is currently very weak.

Common questions

Are GLP-1 medications safe for babies during pregnancy?

The study found no clear or consistent increase in risk for major congenital malformations in babies exposed to these medications. However, the researchers noted that the evidence is currently very weak and they cannot make a definitive conclusion on safety.

Do these medications cause preterm birth or smaller babies?

The data showed no statistically significant differences for preterm birth or for babies being born small for their gestational age. Because the evidence is of low certainty, these results should be discussed with a healthcare provider.

What are the limitations of this finding?

The findings have several limitations, including very low certainty for all key outcomes, imprecise data, and a lack of specific information on exactly when the medications were taken. These factors make it hard to draw firm conclusions.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedOct 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BackgroundTo evaluate maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes after preconception or gestational exposure to glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and dual glucagon-like peptide-1/glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor agonists, and to assess the reproducibility of reported safety signals.MethodsSix databases plus a drug-level safety search were searched through 16 July 2026. Exposure was classified into four clinically defined time windows. Independent studies or data sources were the analytic unit; one primary comparator was selected per study, and odds ratios and risk ratios were synthesized separately. Random-effects meta-analysis, timing-stratified and dominant-study sensitivity analyses, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessment, and GRADE certainty assessment were used.ResultsFourteen comparative data sources were included; 13 were quantitatively eligible and eight contributed to at least one pooled estimate. In the timing-specific analysis of major congenital malformations, four studies with verified periconceptional/first-trimester exposure yielded an odds ratio of 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.77–1.27). A secondary pregnancy-period analysis that added one unadjusted, trimester-unspecified cohort yielded 1.00 (0.94–1.06); that cohort contributed 93.5% of the weight. Pooled preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age birth, and stillbirth analyses showed no statistically significant differences. Preeclampsia and other sparse outcomes were not pooled. Certainty was very low for all key outcomes.ConclusionCurrent evidence does not demonstrate a clear or consistent increase in major congenital malformation risk, but very low certainty, imprecision, residual confounding, heterogeneous comparators, sparse agent-specific data, and uncertain exposure timing preclude conclusions of safety. Reported preeclampsia and renal or urinary signals have not been independently replicated.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.