[Results] 2 weeks on 7.5mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring
2 weeks on 7.5mg, full numbers, ask me anything boring. Full detail below, and I have tried to keep the editorialising out of it.
Pulling the figures out of the title: 2 weeks and 7.5mg. All of it is written down as it happened rather than reconstructed.
The engineering problem was duration: native amylin is short-acting and aggregation-prone. A long-acting analogue suitable for weekly administration is what makes the combination clinically interesting.
Amylin is co-secreted with insulin and acts on satiety and gastric emptying through its own receptor complexes. An amylin analogue is therefore not a variant of an incretin agonist — it is a different signalling axis.
Ask me anything specific. Anything general I will probably get wrong.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Complementary mechanisms are the rationale for pairing: satiety signalling alongside incretin signalling, rather than more agonism at the same receptor.
Asked a question here that turned out to be based on a mechanism confusion. Three people untangled it patiently.
Independent purity data on this compound is sparse compared with the older molecules, simply because far fewer members have paid for testing. Sparse data means wide uncertainty, not a verdict.
long-acting amylin is the whole point of the molecule
phase 3 data will change most of what gets said here
Cosigning on the thin independent data. Fewer members test this, so the bands are wider and should be treated that way.
Read the combination paper twice before saying anything here. The monotherapy and combination arms tell genuinely different stories.
nausea profile in the combination trials is the thing to read carefully
Dosing intuitions from the GLP-1 boards do not transfer. Different receptor family, different exposure-response, and no published schedule for members to reason from.
Disagree — you are quoting a combination arm as though it were monotherapy. Those are different results.
Push back: the evidence base here is thin enough that a confident ranking against the established compounds is not supportable.
Do you have the publication or a summary of it?
Small fix — amylin analogue, not a GLP-1 analogue. The whole mechanism argument changes on that word.
Correcting myself upthread: I gave the 48-week figure and the paper reports 94 weeks.
do not assume the dosing intuitions from the GLP-1 boards transfer
Correction: that is the combination programme, not the monotherapy readout. Different arms, different numbers.
That result is preclinical. Worth flagging, since the thread has been reading it as human data.
Kept a log purely because so few people are logging this one. It is one person and it is not data.
Monotherapy arm or combination arm?
The tolerability tables were more informative than the headline numbers, which is usually the case and never how it gets summarised.
the monotherapy numbers are modest and that is not the point
Nothing containing this compound is approved as a standalone product, and research-use-only material is not approved for human use.
- 1Asked a question here that turned out to be based on a mechanism confusion.…6 comments in this branch · started by u/zeynep_duarte
- 2Do you have the publication or a summary of it?6 comments in this branch · started by u/lucia_bruun