[PSA] SURMOUNT is not what most of this community thinks it is
Right, the TRIUMPH question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 5 data points over 38 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 80, not week 34. 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
This is correct. Discontinuation arms show the regain reality.
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
the 5 week readout is different from the 32 week readout
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
This is correct. Discontinuation arms show the regain reality.
Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.
event rates are more informative than hazard ratios alone
the relative risk reduction in headlines is not the whole story
Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
event rates are more informative than hazard ratios alone
Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.
the discontinuation arms are the interesting part, not the endpoint endpoints
- 1Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On…9 comments in this branch · started by u/nordic_pricing
- 2This is correct. Discontinuation arms show the regain reality.4 comments in this branch · started by u/milos_trevino