Older adults with diabetic foot ulcers healed faster when they were given liraglutide, a diabetes drug from the same family as Ozempic, than when they were given a placebo, according to a randomized trial published in the journal Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome1. The trial also found that one month on the drug lowered blood levels of inflammatory molecules released by aging cells1. But the share of patients who needed an amputation by six months was about the same in both groups1.
What happened
A diabetic foot ulcer is an open sore on the foot that can affect people with diabetes, often because of nerve damage and poor circulation2. These wounds are linked to slow healing, infection, amputation and a heavy burden of illness3.
The research team noted that these ulcers are strongly tied to aging, yet the effect of treatments aimed at aging cells on wound repair in these patients has been poorly characterized1. They set out to test whether a class of drugs called GLP-1 receptor agonists, which they described as geroprotective (possibly protective against aspects of aging), could help these wounds heal1. Liraglutide belongs to that class1, as does semaglutide, the drug sold as Ozempic32.
The paper, by Li, Yan, Li, Wu, Tao, Zhang, Zha, Yang and Liu, was published on October 17, 2026 as an open-access article1. Its title is “Effect of GLP-1RA on circulating SASP levels and wound healing in patients with diabetic foot ulcers: a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial”1.
How the trial worked
The study was a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial1. In plain terms, patients were signed up first and followed forward in time, and chance decided whether each person got the real drug or a placebo (a dummy treatment). The investigators enrolled 105 eligible patients and split them evenly between liraglutide and placebo1.
The patients were older: their average age was 73.7 years, give or take 7.9 years, and 55.2% were men1. The trial was registered in advance, under the code ChiCTR2500104914, on June 25, 20251.
The main thing the researchers measured was how long the wounds took to heal1. Their key second measure was the level in the blood of SASP factors1. SASP stands for “senescence-associated secretory phenotype”: a set of inflammatory molecules given off by senescent cells, sometimes called “zombie” cells, which have stopped dividing and are linked to aging1.
The results
According to the published summary, the trial reported these findings:
- Faster healing. Patients on liraglutide had a significantly shorter wound healing time than those on placebo1.
- Smaller ulcers at one month. The liraglutide group had a greater reduction in ulcer area at the one-month check1.
- More full healing at three months. Complete healing at three months was significantly more common in the liraglutide group1.
- Lower aging-cell signals. Blood levels of several SASP components, including interleukins, chemokines and growth factors (types of signaling molecules involved in inflammation and tissue repair), fell significantly after one month of treatment1.
- No difference in amputations. The six-month amputation rate was similar between the two groups1.
The authors concluded that liraglutide lowers SASP levels across the body and speeds wound healing in these patients, and that their work provides “novel clinical evidence linking geroprotection to wound healing promotion”1.
What it does not show yet
The clearest limit is the amputation result. Faster healing in the first months did not turn into a measurable difference in amputations over six months1. Avoiding amputation is one of the outcomes patients care about most, so this is an important caveat when weighing how much the faster healing matters1.
The fall in SASP levels is a change in blood markers. The coverage notes that it suggests the drug affected body-wide signs of cell aging1. It does not show that lower SASP levels were the reason the wounds healed faster. The trial measured both things at once; it was not built to prove one caused the other.
This is also a single trial of 105 people, and its findings apply to the group studied: older adults with diabetic foot ulcers1. The summary available to Biohack does not give the exact size of the differences in healing time, the doses used, or side effects, so those cannot be reported here. Whether the results hold in younger patients or in other settings is not yet known.
Who is behind it
The paper lists nine authors, led by M. Li and with J. Liu as last author1. The sources available to Biohack do not say who funded the trial or whether any authors have ties to drugmakers. Biohack could not review the full paper for these details.
The news coverage this article draws on came from Scienmag, republished by Bioengineer.org, and was based on the published paper1.
How it fits the field
Until now, evidence on these drugs and foot ulcer healing has come mostly from looking back at records, not from trials. A scoping review presented as a student poster at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley School of Podiatric Medicine in September 2026 searched for studies from 2021 to 20263. It found 602 records, and only two database studies met its criteria3.
One of those, by Lewis and colleagues, compared 6,329 people with diabetic foot ulcers who used semaglutide with 6,329 matched people who did not3. At one year, semaglutide users had lower rates of chronic non-healing wounds (0.75% versus 1.23%) and wound-healing complications (0.19% versus 0.38%), with similar patterns at five years3. The other, by Zhang and colleagues, looked at 1,049 matched users of this drug class and 1,049 non-users after foot reconstruction surgery and reported fewer surgical-site infections and repeat operations among users, but it did not directly measure ulcer closure3.
The review’s authors called the evidence “sparse” and pointed out that these studies relied on billing-style medical codes rather than standard measurements of wound closure or time to healing3. They wrote that prospective studies are needed before these drugs can be considered add-on treatments for ulcer healing3. The new liraglutide trial is that kind of forward-looking, controlled study, though it is one study in one group of patients1.
What to watch next
Another trial is testing the same idea with semaglutide (Ozempic). Sponsored by Radboud university medical center in the Netherlands, it plans to enrol 70 adults with diabetic foot ulcers and lists a start date of March 30, 20262. It compares semaglutide added to standard care against standard care alone, and its main goal is how quickly ulcers close completely2. It will also track ulcer size, blood flow to the leg and foot, infections and amputations2. Patients may be followed for up to six months after their wound heals2.
Results from that trial, and any larger or longer studies of liraglutide, would help show whether faster early healing with these drugs leads to fewer amputations, and whether the drop in aging-cell signals is part of the reason.
