[Results] 45 weeks on 10mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring
45 weeks on 10mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring, and the part I actually want to talk about is at the bottom.
Pulling the figures out of the title: 45 weeks and 10mg. All of it is written down as it happened rather than reconstructed.
Nothing containing this compound is approved anywhere. Research-use-only material is not approved for human use, and that is a statement of fact rather than a disclaimer.
Phase 2 estimates effect and finds a dose range. Phase 3 estimates it precisely in a bigger population and catches what phase 2 was too small to see. Treating them as the same tier of evidence is the recurring error here.
Happy to answer the boring questions. Those are usually the ones worth asking.
best — the order this archive was captured in
the glucagon component is why the metabolic story reads differently
phase 2 data only, and people quote it like it is a label
The thing that surprised me was how much of the discussion here is inference rather than measurement.
It is a triple agonist at the GLP-1, GIP and glucagon receptors. The glucagon arm is the genuinely novel component and it is the one with the least human outcome data behind it.
Trial names corrected in the title. The phase 3 programme and the phase 2 readout are not the same thing.
Cosigning the escalation point. Almost every difficult report on this board is from somebody who went up quickly.
the escalation is where most of the reported trouble sits
Watched heart rate on a wearable across twelve weeks because the threads said to. It moved a little and I have no idea whether that means anything.
Watched heart rate on a wearable across twelve weeks because the threads said to.
Agreed, and the glucagon arm is exactly why the comparison threads do not work.
Has anyone posted an independent test on this compound recently?
Glucagon receptor agonism is associated with increased energy expenditure and with hepatic effects. That is a mechanistic story with strong preclinical support and limited phase 2 human data.
wait for phase 3 before you argue about rankings
Is that the 48-week figure or an earlier readout?
comparing reta phase 2 to sema phase 3 is comparing different things
The constipation profile felt different rather than worse. Hard to describe and impossible to quantify, so take it as an impression.
Disagree. "More receptors means more effect" is not how any of this works and the trial data does not support the linear story.
The phase 2 readout ran to 48 weeks in a few hundred participants with a slow escalation. Both the size and the duration matter when people quote the headline number.
Small fix — three receptors, not two. GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the third one is the reason this compound gets its own board.
[removed by moderator]
Correcting my own comment above: that figure was the 36-week interim, not the 48-week endpoint.
This. The phase 2 result was genuinely large and it was also 48 weeks in a few hundred people.
Correcting my own comment above: that figure was the 36-week interim, not the 48-week endpoint.
Disagree with this specific inference. A 48-week readout does not tell you the shape of the curve after it.
Sceptical of the extrapolation. Forty-eight weeks does not tell you about seventy-two, and the curve shape is exactly what is unknown.
small trial, big effect, wide error bars
Independent purity testing on this compound is thin compared with the older molecules, simply because fewer members have paid for it. Fewer results means wider uncertainty, not a verdict.
Agreed on the heart-rate reports. They are consistent enough across the threads to be worth noting, not enough to be a finding.
Sent a vial to VendorInvestigate out of curiosity. Result was 99.4% against a claimed 98.5%, which is the first independent number I had seen for this compound anywhere.
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme. The number you are quoting is from the phase 2 readout, which is a different trial.
Agreed, and the framing that helps is: this is a phase 2 compound with phase 3 running. Everything else is inference.
Independent purity testing on this compound is thin compared with the older molecules, simply because fewer members have paid for it.
This is the sentence the rest of the board should read first. Phase 2 is not a label.
- 1The phase 2 readout ran to 48 weeks in a few hundred participants with a…8 comments in this branch · started by u/rohan_cardoso
- 2Glucagon receptor agonism is associated with increased energy expenditure…6 comments in this branch · started by u/viktor_laurent