Joint Society Statement From the Society for Endocrinology (SfE), the British Thyroid Association (BTA) and the British Association of Endocrine and Thyroid Surgeons (BAETS) Regarding the Association of GLP‐1 Agonists and Thyroid Cancer
Emma Watts, Jonathan Wadsley, Neil Sharma, Kristien Boelaert

Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
- —The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment · Diabetes Treatment and Management · Cancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1 agonists) have transformed the management of type 2 diabetes and obesity, providing substantial benefits for glycaemic control, weight reduction and cardiometabolic health [1, 2, 3, 4]. Their use is rapidly expanding across both general and specialist practices, with an increasing number of patients also accessing these agents privately for weight management [5, 6]. However, ongoing concern has been raised about a potential association between GLP‐1 agonists and thyroid cancer, in particular medullary thyroid cancer (MTC).
Preclinical rodent studies have found that chronic GLP‐1 agonist exposure stimulates calcitonin secretion, induces C‐cell hyperplasia and increases the incidence of MTC in a dose‐ and drug‐dependent manner [7, 8]. Based on this preclinical data, the US Food and Drug Administration has issued a boxed warning, contraindicating the use of GLP‐1 agonists in those with a personal or family history of MTC or Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 2 (MEN 2) [9]. However, these findings have not been replicated in primates or humans, whose C‐cells exhibit minimal GLP‐1 receptor activity [10, 11, 12, 13, 14].
Clinical evidence remains mixed, but increasingly reassuring. Importantly, no randomised controlled trial in humans has demonstrated a consistent or statistically robust increased incidence of thyroid cancer associated with GLP‐1 receptor agonist therapy [15, 16]. Some pharmacovigilance reports and observational studies have suggested a moderately elevated risk of thyroid cancer [14, 17, 18, 19, 20]. However, large population‐based studies and meta‐analyses found no significant association between GLP‐1 agonist use and thyroid cancer [15, 16, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28]. A recent international meta‐analysis of 98,147 patients found no overall excess risk of thyroid cancer in GLP‐1 agonist users compared with patients treated with Dipeptidyl Peptidase‐4 (DPP‐4) inhibitors (adjusted HR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.59−1.12) [22]. However, long‐term follow‐up is still required. It is also notable that both obesity and diabetes independently increase thyroid cancer risk, complicating the interpretation of observational data [29, 30].
Robust data examining the safety of GLP‐1 agonists in patients who have previously been treated for thyroid cancer is limited. For differentiated thyroid cancer (including papillary, follicular and oncocytic subtypes), GLP‐1 agonists may be used alongside standard oncological surveillance where clinically indicated. A 2022 systematic review found no increased risk of hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, thyroiditis, nodules or goitre with GLP‐1 agonists when compared with controls [16]. However, use of GLP‐1 agonists should be avoided in patients with a history of MTC, known pathogenic germline RET variants or a family history of MEN2. For this patient subgroup, initiation of GLP‐1 agonists should only be considered in exceptional cases within a multidisciplinary (MDT) setting. A statement for patients has also been prepared, included as an appendix, to support clear communication and shared decision‐making between clinicians and individuals considering or currently using GLP‐1 agonists (Appendix S1).
Overall, current available evidence suggests no indication of a clinically meaningful short‐term increase in thyroid cancer risk following GLP‐1 agonist initiation. In October 2023, the European Medicines Agency (EMA)'s safety committee Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) concluded that ‘the available evidence does not support a causal association between [GLP‐1] receptor agonists… and cancer of the thyroid’ [31]. The benefits of therapy are likely to outweigh any potential thyroid‐related risks for most patients. Routine calcitonin measurement or thyroid ultrasound screening is not recommended in unselected patients. Ongoing long‐term surveillance studies will be essential to fully clarify potential late effects.
Funding
The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Supporting information
Appendix 1: GLP‐1 Medication and Thyroid Cancer ‐ Information for Patients.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1J. P. H. Wilding , R. L. Batterham , S. Calanna , et al., “Once‐Weekly Semaglutide in Adults With Overweight or Obesity,” New England Journal of Medicine 384, no. 11 (March 2021): 989–1002.33567185 10.1056/NEJ Moa 2032183 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 2D. K. Mc Guire , N. Marx , S. L. Mulvagh , et al., “Oral Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in High‐Risk Type 2 Diabetes,” New England Journal of Medicine 392, no. 20 (May 2025): 2001–2012.40162642 10.1056/NEJ Moa 2501006 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 3S. P. Marso , G. H. Daniels , K. Brown‐Frandsen , et al., “Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes,” New England Journal of Medicine 375, no. 4 (July 2016): 311–322.27295427 10.1056/NEJ Moa 1603827 PMC 4985288 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 4P. N. Newsome , K. Buchholtz , K. Cusi , et al., “A Placebo‐Controlled Trial of Subcutaneous Semaglutide in Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis,” New England Journal of Medicine 384, no. 12 (March 2021): 1113–1124.33185364 10.1056/NEJ Moa 2028395 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 5J. H. Watanabe , J. Kwon , B. Nan , and A. Reikes , “Trends in Glucagon‐Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist Use, 2014 to 2022,” Journal of the American Pharmacists Association 64, no. 1 (January 2024): 133–138.37821008 10.1016/j.japh.2023.10.002 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 6E. Mahase , “GLP‐1 Agonists: US Sees 700% Increase Over Four Years in Number of Patients Without Diabetes Starting Treatment,” BMJ 386 (July 2024): q 1645.39043396 10.1136/bmj.q 1645 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 7L. W. Madsen , J. A. Knauf , C. Gotfredsen , et al., “GLP‐1 Receptor Agonists and the Thyroid: C‐Cell Effects in Mice Are Mediated via the GLP‐1 Receptor and Not Associated With RET Activation,” Endocrinology 153, no. 3 (March 2012): 1538–1547.22234463 10.1210/en.2011-1864 PMC 3281535 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 8L. Bjerre Knudsen , L. W. Madsen , S. Andersen , et al., “Glucagon‐Like Peptide‐1 Receptor Agonists Activate Rodent Thyroid C‐Cells Causing Calcitonin Release and C‐Cell Proliferation,” Endocrinology 151, no. 4 (April 2010): 1473–1486.20203154 10.1210/en.2009-1272 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
