🍪 The GLP Chatroom uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
Forums›Public Square›Pet photos thread v2 — what worked for you? › Page 2

Pet photos thread v2 — what worked for you?

Dr.MetabolicMD Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 2:39 AM 15 replies 1,818 viewsPage 2 of 3
TrialTracker_MD
Senior Member
2,345
15,678
Jan 2024
Maryland
Dec 30, 2024 at 4:19 AM#6
Dr.GastroMayo said:
Read four things before the headline number.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I would add the less popular caveat: these trial populations under-represented several groups, older adults and the highest BMI categories among them. The results probably generalise, and "probably" should be stated as an assumption rather than dropped.

14 17Dr.EM_Chicago, pete_RVA, CarlaRPh_TPA and 11 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.AddMedPHL
Senior Member
1,234
6,234
Mar 2024
Philadelphia, PA
Dec 30, 2024 at 2:33 PM#7
I keep finding that the number in the press summary and the number in the paper are not the same number, and the difference is always in the same…
...regarding the trial evidence...

I think this is an underappreciated point. To expand on it with some data:

A recent meta-analysis of 15 RCTs (n=12,300) found that the trial evidence was associated with a clinically meaningful effect size across diverse patient populations[1].

The NNT was 12, which is comparable to metformin for T2DM prevention. That's a strong clinical argument for this approach.

Last edited: Dec 30, 2024 at 4:33 PM
15 18sarah_nash92, FitDadDave, RunnerRach and 12 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
PedsEndoPhilly
Member
345
1,890
Jun 2024
Philadelphia, PA
Dec 31, 2024 at 12:47 AM#8
I would add the less popular caveat: these trial populations under-represented several groups, older adults and the highest BMI categories among them.

Propensity score matching studies and the trial evidence: when RCTs aren't available for a specific question, propensity score-matched observational studies can provide useful evidence.

A recent PSM study of 12,000 GLP-1 users vs matched controls showed reduced heart failure hospitalization (HR 0.74) over 3 years of follow-up[1].

These results complement the RCT data and suggest the benefits translate to real-world populations.

References:
[1] Registry-based cohort study, pre-print 2024.
16 19jason_paloalto, Dr.LeslieOBGYN, MikeNYC_runner and 13 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics

Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.

View Results
wendy_avl
Member
245
1,123
Oct 2024
Asheville, NC
Dec 31, 2024 at 11:00 AM#9

Following on from tyler_CSCS — and this may be the naive question:

What would you measure differently if you were starting again?

Last edited: Dec 31, 2024 at 5:00 PM
17 20PharmHunterJen, TomTeleRx, DoseLogDan and 14 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.MetabolicMD
OPVIP Member
2,345
16,789
Jan 2024
Rochester, MN
Jan 2, 2025 at 12:03 PM#10

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

Follow-up: I read the paper rather than the summary and the qualifier I was missing was in the second paragraph of the results.

35 10GenomicsKate, Dr.ObesityMed, HealthEcon_DC and 32 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

SELECT trial 4-year follow-up data released — sustained MACE reduction16 replies
GLP-1 receptor agonists and thyroid C-cell concerns — evidence review19 replies
Is there a ceiling effect for GLP-1-mediated weight loss?20 replies
Comparative pharmacokinetics: semaglutide vs tirzepatide vs retatrutide6 replies
My 18-month semaglutide journey — comprehensive data log20 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register
Threads · Members · Forums
semaglutidetirzepatideretatrutidecompoundingbloodworkside effects