stalled for 11 weeks at 12.5mg and I refuse to panic this time
stalled for 11 weeks at 12.5mg and I refuse to panic this time, and I am aware this is a minority view on this board.
The relevant figures are 11 weeks and 12.5mg, and they come from the same log I have kept the whole time.
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.
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.
That is everything I have. The rest is opinion and I have tried to keep it out.
best — the order this archive was captured in
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.
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.
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.
Cosigning the escalation point. Almost every difficult report on this board is from somebody who went up quickly.
a lot of the confident posting here is extrapolation
a lot of the confident posting here is extrapolation
This is the sentence the rest of the board should read first. Phase 2 is not a label.
Not convinced. You are attributing a week of injection-site soreness to the glucagon arm when the escalation rate alone would explain it.
Not convinced.
Agreed, and the glucagon arm is exactly why the comparison threads do not work.
The injection-site soreness profile felt different rather than worse. Hard to describe and impossible to quantify, so take it as an impression.
phase 2 data only, and people quote it like it is a label
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.
comparing reta phase 2 to sema phase 3 is comparing different things
Small fix — three receptors, not two. GLP-1, GIP and glucagon, and the third one is the reason this compound gets its own board.
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.
Correction: TRIUMPH is the phase 3 programme. The number you are quoting is from the phase 2 readout, which is a different trial.
Which phase 2 arm are you quoting, and at what week?
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.
the escalation is where most of the reported trouble sits
That is body weight change, not fat mass. The trials report the first and people quote it as the second.
the energy-expenditure story is mechanistically interesting and clinically unproven
Sent a vial to Medutest out of curiosity. Result was 98.5% against a claimed 98.0%, which is the first independent number I had seen for this compound anywhere.
Same read. The energy-expenditure mechanism is the interesting bit and it is not established in humans at scale.
Stopped at a low step because there was no reason to go further and no data to tell me what further would do.
heart rate is the thing people report watching
- 1The injection-site soreness profile felt different rather than worse. Hard…8 comments in this branch · started by u/yannick_salinas
- 2Which phase 2 arm are you quoting, and at what week?7 comments in this branch · started by u/matias_falk