[Question] co-agonism — what am I missing here
Slightly embarrassed to be asking this, but: co-agonism — what am I missing here. Complementary mechanisms are the rationale for pairing: satiety signalling alongside incretin signalling, rather than more agonism at the same receptor. Nothing containing this compound is approved as a standalone product, and…
read the combination arms separately from the monotherapy arms
nausea profile in the combination trials is the thing to read carefully
Sent a vial to VendorInvestigate because there was almost nothing on file for this compound. 98.5% against a claimed 98.0%, and I posted it because the log needs entries.
Correction: that is the combination programme, not the monotherapy readout. Different arms, different numbers.
do not assume the dosing intuitions from the GLP-1 boards transfer
independent purity data on this compound is thin
That result is preclinical. Worth flagging, since the thread has been reading it as human data.
[removed by moderator]
Small fix — amylin analogue, not a GLP-1 analogue. The whole mechanism argument changes on that word.
Right, and the tolerability data in the combination arms is the part worth reading properly rather than summarising.
How many separate lots has anyone here tested?
nothing here is approved as a standalone product and research material is not for human use
nothing here is approved as a standalone product and research material is not for human use
This is the distinction that keeps this board honest — different axis, not a stronger version of the same one.
REDEFINE is the combination programme
satiety signalling rather than incretin signalling