[Readout] REDEFINE 1 and what CagriSema actually adds over sema alone
Week 43 update. 34kg down from the start, reflux basically gone since about week 95.
Things that worked: consistency, protein at breakfast, walking more than I want to. Things that did not: everything I bought on the internet to help with reflux.
The part that surprised me is how much of this is admin. Ordering, storing, logging, remembering. Nobody mentions that the hard bit is not the drug, it is the routine.
Happy to answer anything. Please do not ask me what dose you should be on.
best — the order this archive was captured in
The practical rule people converge on is 28 days at fridge temperature after first puncture, and that comes from the preservative, not the peptide.
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
the relative risk reduction in headlines is not the whole story
Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.
What was the dropout rate?
absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide
Phase 2 TRIUMPH looked amazing. Phase 3 trials are harder. Do not anchor on phase 2 readouts.
Small correction: the trial was 12 weeks, not 38. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with SURPASS, not with what you concluded.
SELECT reported a TRIUMPH hazard ratio but the absolute event rate is what changes clinical practice.
Phase 2 TRIUMPH looked amazing.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
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.
Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.
absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide
absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
SURMOUNT-4 discontinuation arm showed regain. That is the reality of a chronic disease treatment, not a failure.
absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
the discontinuation arms are the interesting part, not the FLOW endpoints
absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
- 1Strongly agree. Phase 2 is investigational, not conclusive.8 comments in this branch · started by u/yannick_salinas
- 2absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide8 comments in this branch · started by u/ewan_tulloch