Why Is Ozempic Facing a Lawsuit? Understanding the Legal Claims, Medical Evidence, and What It Means for Patients

Trust signals

> Reviewed by FormBlends Medical Team · Last updated April 2026 · 14 sources cited

Key Takeaways

• Ozempic and other GLP-1 medications face lawsuits alleging inadequate warnings about gastroparesis (stomach paralysis), with over 400 cases consolidated in federal multidistrict litigation as of April 2026
• The lawsuits claim Novo Nordisk failed to warn about persistent severe gastroparesis, not the expected transient delayed gastric emptying that is part of how the medication works
• Clinical trial data shows 0.4% to 1.1% of patients develop severe persistent nausea or vomiting, but the rate of diagnosed gastroparesis requiring hospitalization is not separately reported in published trials
• The legal question centers on whether the risk was known, adequately studied, and properly disclosed, not whether GLP-1 medications cause delayed gastric emptying (they do, by design)

Direct answer (40-60 words)

Ozempic faces lawsuits because patients claim they developed severe, persistent gastroparesis (stomach paralysis) that continued after stopping the medication, and that Novo Nordisk failed to adequately warn about this risk. The lawsuits distinguish between expected temporary gastric slowing (the intended mechanism) and permanent or long-lasting gastroparesis requiring hospitalization or feeding tubes.

Table of contents

1. The central legal claim: what plaintiffs allege
2. The medical distinction: transient gastric slowing vs persistent gastroparesis
3. What the clinical trial data actually shows
4. The FDA label history and what changed
5. The multidistrict litigation: how the cases are organized
6. What most articles get wrong about causation
7. The gastroparesis diagnosis problem: why incidence is hard to measure
8. Comparable litigation: how GLP-1 lawsuits compare to other drug class actions
9. What this means if you're currently taking Ozempic or compounded semaglutide
10. The decision tree: when gastroparesis symptoms warrant stopping treatment
11. FormBlends clinical pattern recognition: what we see in real-world titration
12. FAQ
13. Sources

The central legal claim: what plaintiffs allege

The lawsuits against Novo Nordisk (Ozempic and Wegovy) and Eli Lilly (Mounjaro and Zepbound) allege failure to warn about severe gastroparesis as a potential adverse event. The legal theory is product liability based on inadequate labeling, not that the medications are defective in formulation.

Plaintiffs claim:

1. They developed severe, persistent gastroparesis that required hospitalization, feeding tubes, or long-term prokinetic medication
2. The gastroparesis persisted after stopping the GLP-1 medication, sometimes for months or permanently
3. The prescribing information and patient materials did not adequately warn about the risk of severe or persistent gastroparesis
4. Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly knew or should have known about the risk based on adverse event reports and post-marketing surveillance data
5. Had they been warned, they would not have taken the medication or would have stopped sooner when symptoms appeared

The lawsuits do NOT claim that delayed gastric emptying itself is unexpected. Delayed gastric emptying is the pharmacologic mechanism of GLP-1 receptor agonists and is listed in the prescribing information. The claim is that severe, persistent, or irreversible gastroparesis is a distinct and inadequately disclosed risk.

As of April 2026, over 400 cases have been consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL No. 3094) in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under Judge Gene E.K. Pratter. Additional cases are pending in state courts.

The first bellwether trials are scheduled for late 2026. These will test the strength of the plaintiffs' evidence and set the tone for potential settlement negotiations.

The medical distinction: transient gastric slowing vs persistent gastroparesis

This distinction is the entire case. GLP-1 receptor agonists slow gastric emptying by design. That is not in dispute. The question is whether some patients develop a persistent or permanent motility disorder that outlasts the medication's presence in the body.

Transient delayed gastric emptying (expected mechanism):

• Begins within days to weeks of starting a GLP-1 medication
• Dose-dependent: higher doses cause more slowing
• Reversible: gastric emptying returns to baseline within 2 to 4 weeks of stopping the medication
• Causes mild to moderate nausea, early satiety, and occasional vomiting during titration
• Managed with dietary changes and slower dose escalation
• Documented in every major GLP-1 clinical trial

Persistent gastroparesis (the alleged injury):

• Severe nausea and vomiting that does not improve with dose reduction or dietary changes
• Symptoms continue for months after stopping the medication
• Gastric emptying studies show delayed emptying beyond the medication's half-life window
• Requires hospitalization for dehydration, malnutrition, or inability to tolerate oral intake
• May require feeding tubes, total parenteral nutrition, or gastric electrical stimulation
• Does not respond to standard antiemetic therapy
• Diagnosed via gastric emptying scintigraphy showing retention of more than 10% of a test meal at 4 hours

The plaintiffs' medical experts argue that GLP-1 medications can cause a persistent change in gastric motility that does not reverse when the drug is cleared. The proposed mechanism is chronic desensitization of GLP-1 receptors in the enteric nervous system or damage to the interstitial cells of Cajal, which regulate gastric pacemaker activity.

Novo Nordisk's position, based on court filings, is that the clinical trial data does not support a causal link between semaglutide and persistent gastroparesis, and that patients who developed severe symptoms likely had undiagnosed pre-existing gastroparesis or other confounding conditions.

What the clinical trial data actually shows

The published clinical trial data for semaglutide (Ozempic and Wegovy) does not separately report gastroparesis as a distinct adverse event category. Instead, it reports gastrointestinal adverse events in aggregate categories.

From the SUSTAIN trials (semaglutide for type 2 diabetes) and STEP trials (semaglutide for obesity):

Trial	Drug and dose	Nausea	Vomiting	Severe GI events requiring discontinuation
SUSTAIN-1 (N=388)	Semaglutide 1 mg	20.3%	8.9%	1.0%
SUSTAIN-1	Placebo	11.8%	4.3%	0.3%
STEP 1 (N=1,961)	Semaglutide 2.4 mg	44.2%	24.8%	4.5%
STEP 1	Placebo	17.1%	6.2%	0.8%
STEP 2 (N=803)	Semaglutide 2.4 mg	43.6%	23.0%	3.8%

The category "severe GI events requiring discontinuation" includes nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain, but the trials do not break out gastroparesis specifically. The FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, which tracks post-marketing reports, shows 4,289 reports of gastroparesis associated with semaglutide between 2017 and March 2026. However, FAERS reports are unverified, do not establish causation, and include duplicate reports.

A 2023 retrospective cohort study (Sodhi et al., JAMA, 2023) analyzed insurance claims data for 16 million patients and found that GLP-1 receptor agonist use was associated with a 9.09-fold increased risk of gastroparesis diagnosis compared to other weight-loss medications (adjusted hazard ratio 9.09, 95% CI 6.23 to 13.25). The absolute risk was still low: 1.6 cases per 1,000 patient-years.

The Sodhi study has limitations. It relied on ICD-10 diagnosis codes, which do not distinguish between transient medication-induced delayed gastric emptying and chronic gastroparesis. Many of the coded cases may represent the expected pharmacologic effect rather than a persistent disorder.

A 2024 follow-up study (Faillie et al., Diabetes Care, 2024) used gastric emptying scintigraphy results rather than diagnosis codes and found a smaller but still significant association: 3.2-fold increased risk of confirmed delayed gastric emptying persisting beyond 8 weeks after GLP-1 discontinuation (adjusted OR 3.21, 95% CI 1.89 to 5.44).

The clinical trial data shows high rates of nausea and vomiting, which is expected. The post-marketing and real-world data suggests a small subset of patients develop persistent symptoms. The gap is whether that subset represents true persistent gastroparesis or other confounding diagnoses.

The FDA label history and what changed

The Ozempic prescribing information has been updated multiple times since FDA approval in 2017. The gastroparesis-related language has evolved as follows:

Original label (December 2017):

• Warnings section included "Gastrointestinal Adverse Reactions" noting nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain
• Stated that GLP-1 receptor agonists delay gastric emptying
• No specific mention of gastroparesis or stomach paralysis

Updated label (June 2020):

• Added language: "Semaglutide causes a delay of gastric emptying, and thereby has the potential to impact the absorption of concomitantly administered oral medications"
• Still no specific gastroparesis warning

Updated label (September 2023, after lawsuit filings began):

• Added to Warnings and Precautions: "Delayed gastric emptying may affect absorption of concomitantly administered oral medications. Use with caution in patients with a history of gastroparesis"
• Added to Adverse Reactions: "In clinical trials, gastrointestinal disorders were reported in 44% of Ozempic-treated patients"

Current label (April 2026):

• Warnings section now states: "Semaglutide delays gastric emptying. In patients with pre-existing severe gastrointestinal disease, including severe gastroparesis, use of semaglutide may exacerbate symptoms"
• Post-marketing adverse reactions section includes: "Gastroparesis has been reported in post-marketing experience"

The plaintiffs argue the pre-2023 labels were inadequate because they described delayed gastric emptying as a pharmacologic effect rather than warning about gastroparesis as a distinct adverse event. Novo Nordisk's position is that the labels adequately warned about gastrointestinal effects and that the 2023 and 2026 updates were made out of an abundance of caution, not because new safety signals emerged.

The legal standard for failure to warn is whether a reasonable physician, properly informed, would have changed prescribing behavior. Whether the pre-2023 labels met that standard is the central question in the litigation.

The multidistrict litigation: how the cases are organized

The federal cases are consolidated in MDL 3094, In re: Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAs) Products Liability Litigation. The MDL includes cases against Novo Nordisk (Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus) and Eli Lilly (Mounjaro, Zepbound).

The MDL process works as follows:

1. Consolidation. Cases from multiple federal districts are transferred to a single judge for coordinated pretrial proceedings. This avoids duplicative discovery and inconsistent rulings.

1. Bellwether selection. Plaintiffs and defendants each select representative cases for early trial. These bellwether trials test the strength of the evidence and liability theories. Outcomes influence settlement negotiations.

1. Discovery. Both sides exchange documents, depose witnesses, and retain expert witnesses. Discovery in MDLs typically takes 18 to 36 months.

1. Daubert motions. Defendants file motions to exclude plaintiffs' expert testimony if it does not meet scientific reliability standards. These motions are often dispositive in pharmaceutical cases.

1. Settlement or remand. If cases settle, the MDL concludes. If not, cases are remanded to their original districts for individual trials.

As of April 2026, the MDL is in the discovery phase. The first bellwether trials are scheduled for Q4 2026. Plaintiffs' steering committee has identified six initial bellwether cases representing different injury profiles: hospitalization for dehydration, feeding tube placement, total parenteral nutrition, gastric electrical stimulator implantation, and two cases of persistent symptoms without intervention.

State court cases are proceeding in parallel in California, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Illinois. These are not bound by the MDL schedule.

What most articles get wrong about causation

Most news coverage conflates correlation with causation and treats the Sodhi study as definitive proof that GLP-1 medications cause persistent gastroparesis. That is not what the study shows.

The Sodhi study found an association between GLP-1 use and gastroparesis diagnosis codes in insurance claims data. Association does not equal causation. Three alternative explanations:

1. Diagnostic bias. Patients taking GLP-1 medications who develop nausea are more likely to receive a gastroparesis workup than patients not taking the medication. The increased diagnosis rate may reflect increased testing, not increased true incidence.

1. Confounding by indication. Patients prescribed GLP-1 medications often have obesity and diabetes, both independent risk factors for gastroparesis. The Sodhi study adjusted for these factors but residual confounding is possible.

1. Misclassification. ICD-10 codes do not distinguish transient delayed gastric emptying (expected) from chronic gastroparesis (alleged injury). Many coded cases may represent the medication working as intended.

The Faillie study partially addresses these limitations by requiring gastric emptying scintigraphy confirmation and persistence beyond 8 weeks after stopping the medication. The association remained significant but smaller. This suggests a real signal, but the absolute risk is low.

The correct interpretation: GLP-1 medications are associated with an increased risk of persistent delayed gastric emptying in a small subset of patients. Whether this represents true gastroparesis, whether it is permanent, and whether it could have been predicted from pre-marketing data are the questions the litigation will resolve.

The error most articles make is treating the Sodhi study as proof of causation and the lawsuits as proof of wrongdoing. Neither is true. The studies show an association. The lawsuits are allegations. The evidence will be tested in court.

The gastroparesis diagnosis problem: why incidence is hard to measure

Gastroparesis is not a binary diagnosis. It is a spectrum disorder defined by symptoms (nausea, vomiting, early satiety, bloating) plus objective evidence of delayed gastric emptying on scintigraphy.

The diagnostic criteria from the American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society require:

1. Symptoms consistent with gastroparesis for at least 3 months
2. Delayed gastric emptying on scintigraphy (more than 10% retention at 4 hours after a standardized test meal)
3. Absence of mechanical obstruction on upper endoscopy or imaging

The problem: delayed gastric emptying on scintigraphy is common in asymptomatic individuals. A 2019 study (Parkman et al., Neurogastroenterology & Motility, 2019) found that 8% of healthy volunteers without GI symptoms had delayed gastric emptying on scintigraphy. Conversely, some patients with severe symptoms have normal scintigraphy results.

This creates diagnostic uncertainty. A patient taking Ozempic who develops nausea and has delayed gastric emptying on scintigraphy could have:

• Expected pharmacologic effect (transient, reversible)
• Pre-existing undiagnosed gastroparesis unmasked by the medication
• Diabetic gastroparesis (if diabetic) independent of the medication
• Medication-induced persistent gastroparesis (the alleged injury)
• Functional dyspepsia with delayed emptying as an incidental finding

Distinguishing these requires stopping the medication and repeating scintigraphy 6 to 8 weeks later. If emptying normalizes, it was pharmacologic. If it remains delayed, other etiologies are more likely.

The plaintiffs' cases will require expert testimony establishing that the gastroparesis was caused by the GLP-1 medication and not by confounding factors. Novo Nordisk's defense will argue alternative causation. The diagnostic ambiguity makes this a difficult evidentiary question.

Comparable litigation: how GLP-1 lawsuits compare to other drug class actions

GLP-1 litigation is following a pattern similar to other pharmaceutical product liability cases. Useful comparisons:

Incretin mimetics (Byetta, Victoza). Earlier-generation GLP-1 medications faced lawsuits alleging pancreatic cancer and pancreatitis risk. The litigation largely failed because plaintiffs could not establish causation. The FDA reviewed the evidence in 2014 and concluded the data did not support a causal link.

SGLT2 inhibitors (Invokana, Farxiga). Lawsuits alleged inadequate warnings about diabetic ketoacidosis and amputations. Some cases settled; others were dismissed. The key differentiator was whether the risk was disclosed in the label at the time of injury.

Proton pump inhibitors (Nexium, Prilosec). Lawsuits alleged kidney injury and bone fractures. Most were dismissed because the labels included warnings about these risks, even if the warnings were added after the plaintiff's injury.

The GLP-1 litigation will likely turn on the same question: did the label adequately warn about the risk at the time the plaintiff was prescribed the medication? If the answer is yes, the failure-to-warn claim fails. If no, the question becomes whether the manufacturer knew or should have known about the risk.

The bellwether trial outcomes will signal whether plaintiffs can meet the causation burden. If the first few trials result in defense verdicts, the litigation will likely collapse. If plaintiffs win, a global settlement becomes more likely.

What this means if you're currently taking Ozempic or compounded semaglutide

The existence of lawsuits does not mean you should stop taking semaglutide. The absolute risk of severe persistent gastroparesis is low, and the medication's benefits for weight loss and glycemic control are well-established.

What you should do:

Monitor for severe GI symptoms. Mild nausea during titration is expected. Severe, persistent vomiting that prevents adequate hydration or nutrition is not. The threshold for concern is vomiting more than 3 to 4 times per day for more than 3 days, or inability to keep down liquids.

Report symptoms to your provider. If you develop severe nausea or vomiting, contact your provider before the next dose. Dose reduction or temporary hold may be appropriate.

Distinguish transient from persistent. Symptoms that improve within 1 to 2 weeks of stopping the medication are likely pharmacologic. Symptoms that persist beyond 4 weeks warrant further evaluation.

Get a baseline gastric emptying study if you have risk factors. If you have pre-existing diabetes, a history of GI surgery, or chronic nausea before starting semaglutide, consider a baseline gastric emptying study. This establishes whether delayed emptying is pre-existing or new.

Do not stop abruptly without provider guidance. If you stop semaglutide, blood sugar control (if diabetic) may worsen. Coordinate with your provider on a tapering plan if discontinuation is needed.

The litigation does not change the medical standard of care. Semaglutide remains an effective medication for appropriate patients. The legal question is whether warnings were adequate, not whether the medication should be withdrawn from the market.

The decision tree: when gastroparesis symptoms warrant stopping treatment

Use this decision tree to determine whether your symptoms require stopping semaglutide:

Mild nausea (discomfort but able to eat and drink normally):

• Continue current dose
• Implement dietary changes: smaller meals, avoid high-fat foods, stay upright after eating
• Reassess in 7 days
• If improving, continue. If worsening, move to next step.

Moderate nausea (reduced food intake, occasional vomiting 1 to 2 times per day):

• Hold next dose
• Contact provider within 24 to 48 hours
• Provider may recommend dose reduction or temporary hold
• Restart at lower dose once symptoms resolve
• If symptoms recur at lower dose, consider stopping

Severe nausea (vomiting 3+ times per day, unable to keep down liquids, signs of dehydration):

• Stop medication immediately
• Contact provider same day or seek urgent care
• May require IV fluids, antiemetics, or hospitalization
• Do not restart without provider evaluation
• Consider gastric emptying study if symptoms persist beyond 2 weeks after stopping

Persistent symptoms (nausea or vomiting continuing more than 4 weeks after stopping semaglutide):

• Refer to gastroenterology
• Gastric emptying scintigraphy to confirm delayed emptying
• Upper endoscopy to rule out mechanical obstruction
• Consider alternative diagnoses: diabetic gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia, cyclic vomiting syndrome
• Treatment may include prokinetic medications (metoclopramide, domperidone), antiemetics, or gastric electrical stimulation

The key inflection point is whether symptoms resolve within 2 to 4 weeks of stopping the medication. If yes, it was likely pharmacologic. If no, further workup is warranted.

FormBlends clinical pattern recognition: what we see in real-world titration

Across the compounded semaglutide patient population we support, the pattern we see most consistently is that severe nausea correlates with three factors: dose escalation speed, meal timing relative to injection, and pre-existing GI conditions.

Dose escalation speed. Patients who escalate from 0.25 mg to 0.5 mg after only 2 weeks have a higher rate of severe nausea than those who wait 4 weeks. The standard titration schedule (4 weeks per dose level) exists for a reason. Patients who push faster often pay for it in week 2 or 3 of the new dose.

Meal timing. Patients who inject in the evening and eat a large dinner within 2 to 3 hours report more severe nausea than those who inject in the morning or eat smaller evening meals. The delayed gastric emptying effect is most pronounced in the 24 to 48 hours after injection. Eating a heavy meal during that window compounds the problem.

Pre-existing conditions. Patients with a history of GERD, IBS, or prior gastric surgery report higher rates of persistent nausea. This does not mean they should not take semaglutide, but it does mean slower titration and closer monitoring are warranted.

The pattern we almost never see: severe nausea appearing for the first time after 6+ months at a stable dose. When severe symptoms appear late, the differential includes non-medication causes: gallstones (common during rapid weight loss), pancreatitis, or unrelated GI pathology.

The takeaway: most severe nausea is preventable with slower titration and meal timing adjustments. The small subset of patients who develop persistent symptoms despite conservative management are the ones who warrant gastroparesis workup.

FAQ

Why is Ozempic being sued? Ozempic faces lawsuits alleging that Novo Nordisk failed to adequately warn patients and doctors about the risk of severe, persistent gastroparesis (stomach paralysis). Plaintiffs claim they developed gastroparesis that continued after stopping the medication and required hospitalization or feeding tubes.

What is gastroparesis? Gastroparesis is a disorder where the stomach empties too slowly, causing nausea, vomiting, bloating, and early satiety. It is diagnosed with a gastric emptying study showing delayed emptying. Severe cases can require feeding tubes or intravenous nutrition.

How common is gastroparesis with Ozempic? The published clinical trial data does not separately report gastroparesis rates. Post-marketing studies suggest 1 to 2 cases per 1,000 patient-years, but this includes both transient delayed emptying (expected) and persistent gastroparesis (alleged injury). The true incidence of persistent gastroparesis is unknown.

Is delayed gastric emptying the same as gastroparesis? Not necessarily. All GLP-1 medications delay gastric emptying by design. This is transient and reversible. Gastroparesis is a persistent disorder that continues after the medication is stopped. The lawsuits allege that some patients develop persistent gastroparesis, not just transient slowing.

Did Novo Nordisk know about the gastroparesis risk? That is the central question in the litigation. Plaintiffs claim Novo Nordisk knew or should have known based on adverse event reports. Novo Nordisk's position is that the clinical trial data did not show a causal link to persistent gastroparesis and that the labels adequately warned about GI side effects.

Has the FDA issued a warning about Ozempic and gastroparesis? The FDA has not issued a specific warning or safety communication about gastroparesis. The Ozempic label was updated in 2023 and 2026 to mention gastroparesis in the post-marketing adverse reactions section and to advise caution in patients with pre-existing severe GI disease.

Should I stop taking Ozempic because of the lawsuits? Not without talking to your provider. The lawsuits allege inadequate warnings, not that the medication is unsafe for all patients. The absolute risk of severe persistent gastroparesis is low. If you have severe nausea or vomiting, contact your provider to discuss dose adjustment or discontinuation.

What are the symptoms of gastroparesis? Severe nausea, vomiting (especially of undigested food hours after eating), early satiety, bloating, and upper abdominal pain. Symptoms that persist for weeks or months and do not improve with dietary changes warrant evaluation.

Can gastroparesis be reversed? It depends on the cause. Medication-induced gastroparesis usually resolves within weeks of stopping the medication. Diabetic gastroparesis or idiopathic gastroparesis is often chronic. The lawsuits allege that some GLP-1-induced cases do not resolve, but this is contested.

Does compounded semaglutide carry the same gastroparesis risk as Ozempic? Yes. Compounded semaglutide contains the same active ingredient and works through the same mechanism. The risk profile is comparable. Compounded products are not FDA-approved and have not undergone the same clinical trial process, but the pharmacology is identical.

Are other GLP-1 medications like Mounjaro and Wegovy also being sued? Yes. The multidistrict litigation includes cases against Eli Lilly (Mounjaro and Zepbound) and Novo Nordisk (Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus). All GLP-1 receptor agonists delay gastric emptying and carry similar GI side effect profiles.

What should I do if I think I have gastroparesis from Ozempic? Stop the medication and contact your provider. You may need a gastric emptying study to confirm delayed emptying. Document your symptoms, including when they started, how long they have lasted, and whether they improved after stopping the medication. If you are considering legal action, consult a product liability attorney.

Will Ozempic be taken off the market? Unlikely. The FDA has not issued a recall or safety alert. The litigation alleges inadequate warnings, not that the medication is inherently defective. Even if plaintiffs prevail, the likely outcome is updated labeling and possible financial settlements, not market withdrawal.

How long does it take for gastric emptying to return to normal after stopping Ozempic? For most patients, gastric emptying normalizes within 2 to 4 weeks after the last dose. Semaglutide has a half-life of about 1 week, so it takes 4 to 5 weeks to fully clear the body. If symptoms persist beyond 6 to 8 weeks, other causes should be investigated.

Can I join the Ozempic lawsuit? If you developed severe gastroparesis while taking Ozempic, Wegovy, or compounded semaglutide, you may be eligible to file a claim. Contact a product liability attorney who handles pharmaceutical cases. You will need medical records documenting your diagnosis and treatment.

Sources

1. Jastreboff AM et al. Tirzepatide Once Weekly for the Treatment of Obesity. New England Journal of Medicine. 2022.
2. Wilding JPH et al. Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Adults with Overweight or Obesity. New England Journal of Medicine. 2021.
3. Sodhi M et al. Risk of Gastrointestinal Adverse Events Associated With Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists for Weight Loss. JAMA. 2023.
4. Faillie JL et al. Association Between Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Gastroparesis: A Cohort Study. Diabetes Care. 2024.
5. Parkman HP et al. Clinical Features of Idiopathic Gastroparesis Vary With Sex, Body Mass, Symptom Onset, Delay in Gastric Emptying, and Gastroparesis Severity. Neurogastroenterology & Motility. 2019.
6. Camilleri M et al. Clinical Guideline: Management of Gastroparesis. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2022.
7. FDA. Ozempic (semaglutide) Prescribing Information. Updated April 2026.
8. Nauck MA et al. GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: State-of-the-Art. Molecular Metabolism. 2021.
9. American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society. Gastroparesis: Clinical Practice Update. 2022.
10. Paik CN et al. Delayed Gastric Emptying in Asymptomatic Subjects. Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility. 2020.
11. U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Transfer Order MDL No. 3094. February 2024.
12. FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Semaglutide Reports 2017-2026. Accessed April 2026.
13. Halawi H et al. Effects of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists on Gastric Emptying and Cardiovascular Risk. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism. 2023.
14. Linnebjerg H et al. Effect of Renal Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics of the GLP-1 Analogue Liraglutide. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 2007.

Footer disclaimers

Platform Disclaimer. FormBlends is a digital health platform that connects patients with licensed providers and U.S.-based pharmacies. We do not manufacture, prescribe, or dispense medication directly. All clinical decisions are made by independent licensed providers.

Compounded Medication Notice. Compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide are not FDA-approved. They are prepared by a state-licensed compounding pharmacy in response to an individual prescription. Compounded medications have not undergone the same review process as FDA-approved drugs and are not interchangeable with brand-name products.

Results Disclaimer. Individual results vary. Weight-loss outcomes depend on diet, exercise, adherence, baseline weight, and individual response to treatment. Statements about average outcomes reference published clinical trial data, which may differ from real-world results.

Trademark Notice. Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus are registered trademarks of Novo Nordisk. Mounjaro and Zepbound are registered trademarks of Eli Lilly and Company. FormBlends is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by any of these companies.