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?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of genuine question about TRIUMPH that I am slightly embarrassed to ask — 45 comments in the full submission. View in context.
3k
c/trialwatch·submitted 2 years ago by u/hsa_math

genuine question about TRIUMPH that I am slightly embarrassed to ask

Readoutbranch of 8 comments

Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful. Setup: 0.5mg, week 83, injection-site soreness present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — SURMOUNT — and tracked it for 19 weeks. Result: a difference, but a small one, and well inside what I would call noise if someone else posted…

Read the full submission and all 45 comments →

This branch

8 comments, started 2 years ago
u/rania_salinas419 points·2 years ago

phase 2 is not phase 3, smaller n and shorter trial

replysharereportpermalink
u/heart_rate_bump338 points·2 years ago

phase 2 is not phase 3, smaller n and shorter trial

Disagree on that part. 97.4% and 98.7% on the same vial is normal.

replysharereportpermalink
u/hsa_mathOP172 points·2 years ago

Phase 2 TRIUMPH looked amazing. Phase 3 trials are harder. Do not anchor on phase 2 readouts.

replysharereportpermalink
u/rina_bergstrom131 points·2 years ago

Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.

replysharereportpermalink
u/paper_trail_paulavetting35 points·2 years ago

the 3 week readout is different from the 10 week readout

replysharereportpermalink
u/adaeze_cabrera0 points·2 years ago

off-label use data is different from approved-indication data

replysharereportpermalink
u/nils_tulloch-33 points·2 years ago

press release SURMOUNT posts must be flaired until a publication exists

replysharereportpermalink
u/kaia_cabrera253 points·2 years ago

Yeah, absolute numbers matter more than the press release.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

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

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.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 →