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 [Press Release] new phase 3 numbers, no publication yet, calm down — 31 comments in the full submission. View in context.
685
c/trialwatch·submitted 9 days ago by u/kaia_cabrera

[Press Release] new phase 3 numbers, no publication yet, calm down

Press Releasebranch of 8 comments

new phase 3 numbers, no publication yet, calm down. It is the sort of thing everyone half-believes and nobody writes down. A confidence interval is the range of effects compatible with the data. Two trials with overlapping intervals have not disagreed, whatever their point estimates look like next to each other.…

Read the full submission and all 31 comments →

This branch

8 comments, started 7 days ago
u/joaquin_trevino9 points·7 days ago

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

replysharereportpermalink
u/milan_mensah3 points·7 days ago

check who the comparator was before you compare anything

replysharereportpermalink
u/kaia_cabreraOP1 point·7 days ago

Do you have the publication or the press release?

replysharereportpermalink
u/ines_boateng7 points·7 days ago

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

replysharereportpermalink
u/heart_rate_bump6 points·7 days ago

That is a relative risk reduction. Quoting it without the absolute numbers overstates the case considerably.

replysharereportpermalink
u/ms_fragmenter3 points·7 days ago

That is a relative risk reduction.

Agreed. And the interval, not the point estimate, is what the trial actually established.

replysharereportpermalink
u/yannick_salinas9 points·7 days ago

The registered protocol is public. Comparing the registered primary endpoint with the reported one is a two-minute check and it is how outcome switching gets caught.

replysharereportpermalink
u/eu_apotheke_a5 points·7 days ago

Small fix — that was the cardiovascular outcomes trial, so weight was a secondary endpoint and the population was different.

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

PeptideMeter Analytics

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

peptidemeter.com
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.
Moderators
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.