[Meta] the STEP rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining
FLOW. That is the whole post, but I will justify it.
Everything else people worry about in c/coa is downstream of it. Titration speed, muscle cramps, the endless dose arguments — most of it resolves if you sort FLOW out first, and almost nobody does.
I say this having got it wrong for 14 months. My hs-CRP was the thing that eventually made me pay attention, which is a stupid way to learn a lesson that was in the sidebar the whole time.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.
STEP 1 readout: 97.9% mean weight loss, absolute numbers matter. Spread around that mean is enormous.
event rates are more informative than hazard ratios alone
event rates are more informative than hazard ratios alone
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
STEP 1 readout: 98.9% mean weight loss, absolute numbers matter. Spread around that mean is enormous.
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
off-label use data is different from approved-indication data
off-label use data is different from approved-indication data
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 20 weeks to accept.
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
[deleted]
Which trial and what was the primary endpoint?
off-label use data is different from approved-indication data
Slight fix: the number was 98.7, not 98.9. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Yeah, absolute numbers matter more than the press release.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
phase 2 is not phase 3, smaller n and shorter trial
SURMOUNT-4 discontinuation arm showed regain. That is the reality of a chronic disease treatment, not a failure.
the 23 week readout is different from the 8 week readout
the 5 week readout is different from the 7 week readout
off-label use data is different from approved-indication data
This is correct. Discontinuation arms show the regain reality.
give the trial name, phase, n, and primary endpoint in the body
the relative risk reduction in headlines is not the whole story
- 1The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.9 comments in this branch · started by u/nordic_pricing
- 2Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.9 comments in this branch · started by u/hazard_ratio_hal