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 [Readout] REDEFINE 1 and what CagriSema actually adds over sema alone — 35 comments in the full submission. View in context.
915
c/trialwatch·submitted 14 days ago by u/week_one_wanda

[Readout] REDEFINE 1 and what CagriSema actually adds over sema alone

Readoutbranch of 8 comments

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,…

Read the full submission and all 35 comments →

This branch

8 comments, started 12 days ago
u/ewan_tulloch36 points·12 days ago

absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide

replysharereportpermalink
u/yusuf_achebe22 points·12 days ago

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.

replysharereportpermalink
u/valeria_karlsen14 points·12 days ago

absolute risk reduction, not relative risk reduction, that is how you decide

replysharereportpermalink
u/ms_fragmenter12 points·12 days ago

The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.

replysharereportpermalink
u/week_one_wandaOP5 points·12 days ago

SURMOUNT-4 discontinuation arm showed regain. That is the reality of a chronic disease treatment, not a failure.

replysharereportpermalink
u/pancreatitis_scare11 points·12 days ago·edited

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.

replysharereportpermalink
u/enzo_ferrari5 points·12 days ago

the discontinuation arms are the interesting part, not the FLOW endpoints

replysharereportpermalink
u/laila_almeida24 points·12 days ago

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.

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.