GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Archived. This submission is more than a year old. Votes and new comments are closed, and some of the advice in it may have been superseded — check the community wiki for the current version.
Locked. A moderator closed replies on this one. It stays up because the content above the argument is worth keeping.
3.5k
c/trialwatch·posted 2 years ago by u/rina_sobczak

[Discussion] the endpoint advice in here is 3 years out of date

Discussion Well Actually ×2 Slow Clap ×3 Cold Box ×1

Thinking out loud about this: the endpoint advice in here is 3 years out of date.

3 years — those are the numbers, and they are the ones I am willing to defend.

Discontinuation rates are a tolerability result. A trial with a strong efficacy number and heavy discontinuation is telling you two things and people only quote one.

Spent an evening with the appendix tables and found the subgroup detail that the entire thread had been speculating about.

Sceptical readings welcome. The confident ones are the ones I distrust.

3,772 up / 300 down93% upvoted51 commentsid 4od7lq6 Apr 2024

51 comments

12 in this archive, depth 4

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/sten_palacios333 points·2 years ago

Relative risk reduction without the baseline rate is uninterpretable. A large relative reduction on a small absolute risk is a small absolute benefit.

replysharereportpermalink
u/alcohol_aversion91 points·2 years ago

This. Intention-to-treat versus completer analysis routinely moves the headline by several points.

replysharereportpermalink
u/annika_fonseca44 points·2 years ago

How long was the randomised phase before any extension?

replysharereportpermalink
u/trialwatch_theoMOD172 points·2 years ago

Retitled: the original quoted a diabetes endpoint as an obesity result.

replysharereportpermalink
u/nikhil_lindqvist45 points·2 years ago

What did the confidence interval look like?

replysharereportpermalink
u/zaid_roos36 points·2 years ago·edited

Correction: SURMOUNT is the obesity programme and SURPASS is the diabetes one. The figure you quoted belongs to the other one.

replysharereportpermalink
u/renal_outcomes_rnephro-curious193 points·2 years ago

trial populations get support that nobody on this board gets

replysharereportpermalink
load more comments (1) →
u/karl_fischer_kev358 points·2 years ago

intention to treat versus completers changes the number substantially

replysharereportpermalink
u/rina_sobczakOP193 points·2 years ago

What was the comparator?

replysharereportpermalink
u/formulary_fighterappeals50 points·2 years ago·edited

Argued for a week about a result and then read the limitations section, which conceded most of my opponent’s point.

replysharereportpermalink
u/rina_sobczakOP30 points·2 years ago

Which trial, and which arm?

replysharereportpermalink
Permalinked branches
Deep branches get their own page so a single reply chain can be linked and read on its own.
About c/trialwatch

Clinical trial reading group. New readouts, protocol amendments, endpoint definitions, dropout handling, and the difference between a press release and a publication. Absolute risk reduction and number-needed-to-treat are house dialect here.

34kmembers
95submissions
Nov 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
More in c/trialwatch
c/trialwatch rules
  1. Press-release-only posts must be flaired Press Release until a publication exists.
  2. Give the trial name, phase, n, and primary endpoint in the body.
  3. Relative risk reduction alone is not a result. Show the absolute numbers.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/trialwatch_theou/forest_plot_fionau/hazard_ratio_halu/renal_outcomes_r
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.

Full disclaimer →