GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
853
c/survodutide·posted 8 months ago by u/patient_labslip_log

someone explain biopsy to me like I have not read a paper in years

Question Well Actually ×2

Slightly embarrassed to be asking this, but: someone explain biopsy to me like I have not read a paper in years.

Bought small because the evidence base is early. That is the only defensible position I could construct.

The honest evidence position, written out so this board does not drift.

Phase 2 data exists in a specific, biopsy-characterised population, with a slow protocol escalation and tolerability tables worth reading in full. Nothing containing this compound is approved by any regulator anywhere. Research-use-only material is not approved for human use.

Independent purity results across this entire site number in the low single figures. That means nobody here — including the people who post most confidently — has a basis for statements about batch-to-batch consistency. If you test something, post it; the log is the only thing that will change that position.

The endpoint vocabulary, because you cannot read this literature without it.

Resolution of steatohepatitis without worsening of fibrosis and improvement in fibrosis without worsening of steatohepatitis are the two standard composite endpoints, both scored on biopsy by pathologists against a defined system. Liver fat fraction is an imaging surrogate that correlates imperfectly with histology.

A trial can move the surrogate substantially and the histological endpoint modestly. Both results are real; they answer different questions. Anybody quoting a response rate here should say which endpoint it refers to, and most summaries do not.

If somebody has the same thing measured a different way, post it next to mine and we will see whether they agree.

969 up / 116 down89% upvoted44 commentsid w18rgx22 Nov 2025

44 comments

14 in this archive, depth 5

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/fibre_forward46 points·8 months ago

Histological endpoints in this field are scored on biopsy: resolution of steatohepatitis without worsening of fibrosis, or improvement in fibrosis without worsening of steatohepatitis. Both are harder to achieve and to interpret than an imaging surrogate.

replysharereportpermalink
u/incretin_ivypharmacology54 points·8 months ago

Disagree — that is a weight endpoint from a different programme and you are quoting it in a hepatic context.

replysharereportpermalink
u/rania_marchand17 points·8 months ago

the weight numbers are secondary to what this is being developed for

replysharereportpermalink
u/cormac_danquah5 points·8 months ago

Cosigning on the glucagon arm. It is the mechanistic thread that connects the hepatic and the metabolic effects.

replysharereportpermalink
u/incretin_ivypharmacology4 points·8 months ago

Independent purity results for this compound are very sparse across the whole site, which means any impression about consistency is built on almost nothing.

replysharereportpermalink
u/renzo_yildiz5 points·8 months ago

Phase 2 in a biopsy-confirmed population is a demanding design: recruitment is slow, the population is specific, and the results do not generalise to people who have not been characterised that way.

replysharereportpermalink
u/refund_ledger45 points·8 months ago

Small fix — dual agonist, GLP-1 and glucagon. No GIP arm in this molecule.

replysharereportpermalink
u/preservative_free_p31 points·8 months ago

Agreed. The hepatic programme is the point of this compound and the weight discussion is a side effect of the side effect.

replysharereportpermalink
u/customs_seizure_sid30 points·8 months ago

What this compound is actually being developed for, since the boards treat it as a weight-loss molecule with a footnote.

It is a dual GLP-1 and glucagon receptor agonist, and the glucagon arm links to hepatic fat and energy expenditure. The headline programme is metabolic liver disease, with endpoints scored on biopsy rather than on a scale.

That matters for how the data should be read. A histological response rate in a biopsy-confirmed population answers a very different question from a mean weight change in an obesity trial, and quoting one in place of the other — which happens in nearly every thread here — is not a comparison.

replysharereportpermalink
u/patient_labslip_log20 points·8 months ago

What this compound is actually being developed for, since the boards treat it as a weight-loss molecule with a footnote.

Disagreeing with this bit: that number comes from a different programme with a different population.

replysharereportpermalink
u/deleted_my_history21 points·8 months ago

Same. Very thin independent data on this one, which should make everybody here more tentative than they are.

replysharereportpermalink
u/patient_labslip_logOP15 points·8 months ago

Which phase and which arm are you quoting?

replysharereportpermalink
u/joaquin_ivaturi20 points·8 months ago

Looked for independent results across this whole site and found almost none. Worth knowing before forming an opinion.

replysharereportpermalink
u/draw_up_dizzy16 points·8 months ago

Went slowly because everything published describes a deliberate escalation. That is the extent of what I will say about it.

replysharereportpermalink
Permalinked branches
Deep branches get their own page so a single reply chain can be linked and read on its own.
About c/survodutide

Survodutide-specific discussion: glucagon-receptor co-agonism, the hepatic fat and MASH resolution data, and how the side-effect profile compares with GIP-based dual agonism. Small community, high signal.

12kmembers
62submissions
Feb 2024created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
c/survodutide rules
  1. Glucagon co-agonism has a distinct safety story. Do not generalise from tirzepatide.
  2. MASH claims need the trial and the biopsy endpoint.
  3. Not approved. Descriptive posts only.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.