GLP-1 receptor agonists induce substantial weight loss, but the extent to which lean tissue and physical function are preserved in routine care remains poorly understood. Using an EHR-linked body-composition digital phenotyping pipeline with LLM-based extraction, we performed a large-scale longitudinal analysis of 670,422 first-episode GLP-1RA users, including 456,742 treated with semaglutide and 213,680 treated with tirzepatide. Among these, 7,965 individuals with paired pre- and post-initiation body-composition measurements were analyzed over 12 months. Tirzepatide was associated with greater relative lean body mass (LBM) loss than semaglutide at each measured time point, with excess LBM losses of 1.1%, 1.5%, 1.3% and 2% at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, respectively. A Depletive GLP-1 metabotype, defined as >20% total body weight (TBW) loss with >5% LBM loss, was significantly more frequent with tirzepatide than semaglutide during the first year of therapy (10.3% versus 6.7%, p<0.001). By contrast, a Prime GLP-1 metabotype, defined as >10% TBW loss with <5% LBM loss, was numerically more frequent with semaglutide than tirzepatide, but not significantly so (12.3% versus 11.8%, p=0.66). Higher drug dose and longer exposure were associated with progressively greater LBM decline in both treatment groups (both p<0.001). Among 3,746 examined EHR phenotypes, baseline musculoskeletal pain emerged as the most significant correlate of greater LBM loss (BH-adjusted q<0.001): cervicalgia (semaglutide, −4.1 percentage points; tirzepatide, −14.3 percentage points) and knee pain (semaglutide, −4.8 percentage points; tirzepatide, −13.4 percentage points), consistent with mobility-limited patients being more vulnerable to lean-tissue depletion during incretin therapy. Analysis of EHR notes for on-treatment functional features showed reduced exercise tolerance was the strongest correlate of greater LBM loss, increasing by 7.2 and 11.1 percentage points in semaglutide- and tirzepatide-treated patients, respectively. An independent analysis of all available Single-cell RNA-seq data from human musculature showed broader GIPR+ cellular distribution than GLP1R+ cells across immune, stromal, vascular, and contractile compartments, providing plausible biological context for the greater LBM loss observed in routine care with tirzepatide (dual GLP1R-GIPR agonist) relative to semaglutide (GLP1R-specific agonist). In this observational study, greater weight-loss efficacy did not necessarily translate into more favorable body-composition outcomes, underscoring the need for clinical decision-making and trial designs that maximize each patient’s likelihood of achieving a Prime GLP-1 metabotype.

The authors are employees of nference, inc., which conducts research collaborations with various biopharmaceutical companies whose therapeutic products are included in this study. None of these companies, nor any other nference collaborator, funded, supported, or had any role in the independent study design, data acquisition, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or the decision to submit this work for publication. All analyses were conducted by the authors using de-identified electronic health record data. The authors declare no additional competing interests.

This study did not receive any external funding.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study analyzed de-identified EHR data from academic medical centers in the United States via the nference nSights Analytics Platform. Prior to analysis, all data underwent expert determination de-identification satisfying HIPAA Privacy Rule requirements (45 CFR 164.514(b)(1)), employing a multi-layered transformation approach for both structured data (cryptographic hashing of identifiers, date-shifting, geographic truncation) and unstructured clinical text (ensemble deep learning and rule-based methods with <99% recall for personally identifiable information detection)35,36. nference established secure data environments within each participating center, housing these de-identified patient data governed by expert determination. These de-identified data environments were specifically designed to enable data access and analysis without requiring Institutional Review Board oversight, approval, or exemption confirmation. Accordingly, informed consent and IRB review were not required for this study. 35.Murugadoss, K. et al. Building a best-in-class automated de-identification tool for electronic health records through ensemble learning. Patterns (N Y) 2, 100255 (2021). 36.Murugadoss, K. et al. Scaling text de-identification using locally augmented ensembles. medRxiv 2024.06.20.24308896 (2024) doi:10.1101/2024.06.20.24308896.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes