[Discussion] the endpoint advice in here is 5 years out of date
Right, the TRIUMPH question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 15 data points over 14 weeks. The pattern is consistent enough that I do not think it is chance, and boring enough that nobody is going to screenshot it, which is usually a good sign.
The thing I would flag for anyone new: the effect I am describing showed up at week 18, not week 67. People give up long before the interesting part.
Interested in whether this matches other people's logs or whether I am an outlier.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Yeah, absolute numbers matter more than the press release.
Crossposting this to c/sideeffects because the people who need it are not reading this community.
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
Phase 2 TRIUMPH looked amazing. Phase 3 trials are harder. Do not anchor on phase 2 readouts.
the relative risk reduction in headlines is not the whole story
Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.
the discontinuation arms are the interesting part, not the SURPASS endpoints
SURMOUNT-4 discontinuation arm showed regain. That is the reality of a chronic disease treatment, not a failure.
This is correct. Discontinuation arms show the regain reality.
I am going to push back on this slightly.
the 10 week readout is different from the 16 week readout
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
off-label use data is different from approved-indication data
press release SURMOUNT posts must be flaired until a publication exists
Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
Adding to this: TRIUMPH is doing more work than the comment implies.
phase 2 is not phase 3, smaller n and shorter trial
Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
the discontinuation arms are the interesting part, not the FLOW endpoints
off-label use data is different from approved-indication data
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
SURMOUNT-4 discontinuation arm showed regain. That is the reality of a chronic disease treatment, not a failure.
- 1nobody says this and everybody needs to hear it17 comments in this branch · started by u/first_hundred
- 2Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.4 comments in this branch · started by u/hazard_ratio_hal