what changed for me between month 3 and month 6
what changed for me between month 3 and month 6. Searched first, found three threads that contradict each other, hence the post.
Compared milligram figures across two completely different molecule classes in a comment. Deserved the correction.
Went looking for independent testing on this and found essentially nothing, which was clarifying.
Daily rather than weekly sounds trivial until you think about what a missed dose means in each case.
If two or three other people have done the same thing we might actually learn something. Alone it is an anecdote.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Milligram comparisons across molecule classes are meaningless. Potency is a property of the molecule at its receptor, not of the number on the label.
nothing containing this is approved anywhere yet
oral and non-peptide is the whole engineering story
the tolerability profile reads broadly similar to the class
the tolerability profile reads broadly similar to the class
Disagreeing with this bit: daily dosing is a different adherence problem, not a better one.
Same view. The analytical problem is different enough that the usual purity discussions here do not transfer cleanly.
Left up. It is careful about what is peptide and what is not, which is more than most threads here manage.
phase 3 is where the comparison becomes fair
What analytical method was used — this is not the usual peptide assay question?
Same view.
Adding the standing caveat — unapproved, and research material is not for human use.
Nothing containing this compound is approved by any regulator, and research-use-only material is not approved for human use.
Is that from the publication or the press release?
Are you comparing doses across a small molecule and a peptide?
daily dosing, not weekly, so the exposure profile is different
Daily dosing gives a very different exposure profile from a weekly injectable: peaks and troughs within each day rather than a smoothed weekly curve.
ATTAIN and ACHIEVE are the programmes to keep straight
[deleted]
Small fix — the two programme names got swapped upthread and it changes which population the figure came from.
Milligram-for-milligram comparison with an injectable peptide is not meaningful and I should not have made it.
Analytically this is a small-molecule identity and purity problem, not a peptide one. The methods, the impurity classes and the reference standards are all different.
the boards keep comparing it to injectables at matched doses, which is meaningless
Disagree. You are comparing doses across a small molecule and a peptide, which is not a comparison of anything.
- 1Daily dosing gives a very different exposure profile from a weekly…7 comments in this branch · started by u/adaeze_cabrera