reading cagrilintide threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly
reading cagrilintide threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly. Not a hot take, just something I have not seen said plainly here. Asked a question here that turned out to be based on a mechanism confusion. Three people untangled it patiently. Went looking for independent results on this and found a handful across…
Dosing intuitions from the GLP-1 boards do not transfer. Different receptor family, different exposure-response, and no published schedule for members to reason from.
Read the combination paper twice before saying anything here. The monotherapy and combination arms tell genuinely different stories.
[removed by moderator]
Are you comparing against a GLP-1 monotherapy result? They are not comparable.
Combination and monotherapy arms must be read separately. Efficacy and tolerability both differ substantially between them and summaries routinely blur the two.
Do you have the publication or a summary of it?
Are you comparing against a GLP-1 monotherapy result?
Agreed, and the combination arms are where the interesting numbers actually live.
amylin analogue, different receptor family, different story
read the combination arms separately from the monotherapy arms
amylin analogue, different receptor family, different story
Disagreeing with this line: that figure is from a combination arm and is being quoted as monotherapy.
Bought small deliberately because the evidence base is thin. That felt like the only defensible approach.