my A1c moved and I cannot work out whether TRIUMPH is why
Thinking out loud about this: my A1c moved and I cannot work out whether TRIUMPH is why.
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.
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.
Went up slowly, deliberately, because everything on this board says the escalation is where trouble lives. Uneventful so far and I am not going to pretend that is a finding.
If two or three other people have done the same thing we might actually learn something. Alone it is an anecdote.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Increases in heart rate have been reported across this receptor class. The magnitude and clinical significance are exactly what phase 3 is powered to establish.
Push back: quoting the phase 2 headline as an expected outcome is not a fair reading of a small trial with wide intervals.
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.
Which phase 2 arm are you quoting, and at what week?
Read the phase 2 paper twice before ordering anything. Recommend that to anyone in this board: the error bars are the interesting part.
not approved anywhere, which is the single most important fact in this board
Sceptical of the extrapolation. Forty-eight weeks does not tell you about seventy-two, and the curve shape is exactly what is unknown.
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme. The number you are quoting is from the phase 2 readout, which is a different trial.
research-use-only material is not approved for human use, full stop
Kept a log specifically because there is so little published. It is one person and it is not data.
triple agonist — GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the glucagon arm is the new part
triple agonist — GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the glucagon arm is the new part
Disagree with this specific inference. A 48-week readout does not tell you the shape of the curve after it.
Same read. The energy-expenditure mechanism is the interesting bit and it is not established in humans at scale.
Right, and it bears repeating that nothing here is approved anywhere and research material is not for human use.
The thing that surprised me was how much of the discussion here is inference rather than measurement.
Are you comparing against phase 3 numbers for something else? They are not comparable.
the glucagon component is why the metabolic story reads differently
How fast was the escalation? That is usually the variable that explains the reports.
Agreed on the heart-rate reports. They are consistent enough across the threads to be worth noting, not enough to be a finding.
a lot of the confident posting here is extrapolation
Careful with the rankings. A phase 2 result and a phase 3 result are not on the same evidential footing and cannot be listed in one table.
small trial, big effect, wide error bars
Has anyone posted an independent test on this compound recently?
Removed the escalation schedule. There is no published protocol for members to follow and inventing one here is exactly what this board does not do.
- 1Same read. The energy-expenditure mechanism is the interesting bit and it is…11 comments in this branch · started by u/nikhil_lindqvist
- 2Which phase 2 arm are you quoting, and at what week?9 comments in this branch · started by u/soren_nkemelu