[Discussion] can we stop arguing about endpoint until somebody posts a number
Right, the SURMOUNT question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 21 data points over 14 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 11, not week 60. 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
Three years on this site and the questions have not changed at all. Which is depressing or reassuring depending on the day.
Yeah, absolute numbers matter more than the press release.
What was the dropout rate?
What was the dropout rate?
Disagree on that part. 95.1% and 97.6% on the same vial is normal.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
[removed by moderator]
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.
Half-life is about 168 hours, so steady state lands around week 18–5. Practical consequence: what you feel in week 1 is not what that dose does.
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 81 weeks to accept.
STEP, SURMOUNT, SURPASS, SELECT, FLOW, TRIUMPH — read the appendix
give the trial name, phase, n, and primary endpoint in the body
the discontinuation arms are the interesting part, not the FLOW endpoints
- 1saved. thank you.6 comments in this branch · started by u/anders_vermeulen
- 2off-label use data is different from approved-indication data5 comments in this branch · started by u/ahmed_iyer