the SURPASS question that gets asked weekly, answered properly
Posting this because I searched for it and got nothing useful.
Setup: 1.0mg, week 90, injection-site soreness present but not ruining anything. I changed exactly one variable — TRIUMPH — and tracked it for 8 weeks.
Result: a difference, but a small one, and well inside what I would call noise if someone else posted it. So I am putting it here rather than presenting it as a finding. If two or three other people have done the same thing we might actually learn something.
Not medical advice, obviously. This is one person with a spreadsheet.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Half-life is about 168 hours, so steady state lands around week 10–5. Practical consequence: what you feel in week 1 is not what that dose does.
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
number-needed-to-treat is the house dialect
Not to be pedantic but STEP and SELECT are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
Water content matters more than people think. If a vial is carrying residual moisture, your "10mg" is not 10mg of peptide.
What was the dropout rate?
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
press release SURMOUNT posts must be flaired until a publication exists
Not to be pedantic but FLOW and endpoint are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 10 weeks to accept.
dropout handling matters, especially on GI-heavy populations
SELECT reported a SELECT hazard ratio but the absolute event rate is what changes clinical practice.
Slight fix: the number was 98.7, not 98.9. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.
Phase 2 TRIUMPH looked amazing. Phase 3 trials are harder. Do not anchor on phase 2 readouts.
This is correct. Discontinuation arms show the regain reality.
SURMOUNT-4 discontinuation arm showed regain. That is the reality of a chronic disease treatment, not a failure.
the 22 week readout is different from the 39 week readout
Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.
I am going to push back on this slightly.
Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with SURPASS, not with what you concluded.
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
Disagree.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
Disagree.
Disagree on that part. 98.1% and 98.3% on the same vial is normal.
- 1Water content matters more than people think. If a vial is carrying residual…7 comments in this branch · started by u/receipts_or_nothing
- 2n=1 but same6 comments in this branch · started by u/tomas_kimani