Skip to content
This GLP
← Research
Evidence

GLP-1 drugs in psoriasis: four outcomes fell, and one fell too far

A 3,048-pair cohort found lower mortality, fewer cardiac events and less alcohol and substance use. The mortality figure — a hazard ratio of 0.219 — is larger than any trial has produced.

Dana Sullivan5 min read
Hazard ratio against other obesity and diabetes drugsDeath, any cause0.22Alcohol use0.35Substance use0.51Major cardiac event0.561.03,048 matched pairs, two years

Psoriasis carries a heavier load of heart disease and metabolic illness than the skin lesions suggest, so a drug class aimed at weight and glucose has an obvious reason to be studied in it. A population cohort drawn from the US TriNetX database matched 3,048 psoriasis patients taking a GLP-1 receptor agonist against 3,048 taking other antidiabetic or antiobesity drugs, and followed both for two years [1]. The comparator matters more than the result: everybody here was being treated for something, which makes this a question about which drug, not about whether to take one — the same distinction that separates a real price from a headline on the sellers ranked here.

What the cohort reported

All-cause mortality was lower in the GLP-1 arm, at a hazard ratio of 0.219 (95% CI 0.123 to 0.391, P < 0.001). Major adverse cardiac events came in at 0.561 (95% CI 0.442 to 0.714, P < 0.001). Two psychiatric outcomes also fell: alcohol use at 0.346 (95% CI 0.174 to 0.685, P = 0.009) and substance use at 0.510 (95% CI 0.350 to 0.743, P = 0.002). The authors report that typical adverse drug events were no more frequent in the GLP-1 arm.

The mortality figure is the one to distrust

A hazard ratio of 0.219 describes a group dying at roughly a fifth the rate of its comparator. No randomized trial of this drug class has produced anything close to that, and the gap between a trial estimate and an observational one is usually the study design rather than the drug. Sicker patients are prescribed differently, and a matched cohort can only balance what was recorded. We have written about this shape before, where authors of a mortality analysis doubted their own result for the same reason.

The cardiac figure is easier to believe, because it sits closer to what the cardiovascular outcome trials found, and the psychiatric figures are interesting mainly because the debate about this class has run in the opposite direction — a question we have followed through the suicidality signal and its comparators.

What it does not tell a buyer

No telehealth seller prescribes for psoriasis, and nothing here is a reason to start or stop a drug. What the study is useful for is reading a marketing claim: the risk reductions here were larger in the psoriasis cohort than in cohorts without it, which is precisely the kind of subgroup finding a landing page will quote without its population attached. Before a first order, the more useful questions are about who is prescribing and what happens at a higher dose — the ones we keep listed in questions they leave open.

Frequently asked

Do GLP-1 drugs help psoriasis?
This study did not measure the skin. It measured death, cardiac events and psychiatric outcomes in people who have psoriasis, against other diabetes and obesity drugs.
Why distrust the mortality number?
A hazard ratio of 0.219 means a fifth the death rate, which no randomized trial of this class has shown. In a matched cohort that size of effect usually reflects who gets prescribed what, not what the drug does.
What was the comparison group?
Psoriasis patients taking other antidiabetic or antiobesity drugs — not untreated people. That makes it a question of which drug rather than whether to treat.

Sources

  1. [1] Olbrich H, et al. (2026). Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and reduced mortality, cardiovascular and psychiatric risks in patients with psoriasis: a large-scale cohort study British Journal of Dermatology. PMID 40897378

Where to get it

Best GLP-1 injections

Every injectable seller we can verify, with the price each one publishes and an honest read of what the trials measured.

Compare providers →

More in Evidence