We appreciate the constructive dialogue from Cheng on our study’s findings.1 We agree that any clinical database study has limitations that necessitate careful interpretation of results. Manual medical records review is a logical next step to mitigate these shortcomings and allow a more thorough examination of each patient’s course. Nevertheless, we re-analysed our data in response to points raised.

The analyses in our original paper suggest an elevated risk of undergoing an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients treated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) compared with control. As mentioned in our prior reply,2 we recognise that there is a potential diagnostic bias from this observation. We re-ran our cohorts and found that the rate of undergoing an EGD in the propensity-score matched cohort receiving short-acting GLP-1 RA was …