Journal club: FLOW and the renal composite, component by component
Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.
The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.
Coming back to post #26, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Two things before anyone answers the substance.
First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.
SOUL (N Engl J Med 2025): Oral semaglutide cardiovascular outcomes. Extends the cardiovascular evidence to the oral formulation. Note that oral bioavailability is lower and more variable than injectable.
STEP 1 (N Engl J Med 2021): The pivotal obesity trial for semaglutide and the reference point for most subsequent comparison. Mean weight reduction was substantially larger than anything previously achieved pharmacologically.
On post #44 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
SOUL (N Engl J Med 2025): Oral semaglutide cardiovascular outcomes. Extends the cardiovascular evidence to the oral formulation. Note that oral bioavailability is lower and more variable than injectable.
I read post #69 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
FLOW (N Engl J Med 2024): Semaglutide renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease. Stopped early for efficacy. Component-by-component analysis is essential because the components differ in how patient-important they are.
Coming back to post #73, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
TRIUMPH (ongoing): Retatrutide phase 3. No results yet. Nothing should be attributed to it because it has not finished. When it does, this discussion will return to it.
post #82 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
SOUL (N Engl J Med 2025): Oral semaglutide cardiovascular outcomes. Extends the cardiovascular evidence to the oral formulation. Note that oral bioavailability is lower and more variable than injectable.
Read the full topic (92 posts)
This topic was referenced in
- Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier sessionEvidence › Journal club · 125 replies
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Journal club: indirect comparison between two programmes, defended and attacked — one year on
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Journal club: indirect comparison between two programmes, defended and attacked — one year on Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing SURPASS-2 ( N…
|
+45 | 50 | 3k | 9mo |
|
[2026 update] Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session
Journal club: what we got wrong in an earlier session — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I have seen STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021) cited in support of a claim I do not think it…
|
+5 | 9 | 4.2k | 1d |
|
Journal club: is percentage weight change the right endpoint?
Journal club: is percentage weight change the right endpoint? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Comparing SURPASS-4 ( Lancet , 2021) with SURMOUNT-OSA (…
|
+116 | 120 | 23k | 3mo |
|
Journal club: STEP 1 and the treatment-policy estimand — does this still hold?
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Journal club: STEP 1 and the treatment-policy estimand — does this still hold? Comparing STEP 2 ( Lancet , 2021) with SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med ,…
|
+70 | 76 | 4.8k | 15h |
|
Journal club: SELECT, absolute risk, and how it was reported — a second dataset
On the subject in the title: Journal club: SELECT, absolute risk, and how it was reported — a second dataset Working notes rather than a conclusion. Comparing SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022) with SELECT ( N…
|
4 | 1.3k | 1mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags randomised trial, estimand, risk of bias
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Open-label extensions: what survives and what does not
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Open-label extensions: what survives and what does not Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing STEP 8 ( JAMA , 2022) with PIONEER 6 ( N Engl J Med ,…
|
4 | 22k | 3mo | |
|
Interim analyses and stopping rules — does this still hold?
Interim analyses and stopping rules — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Comparing SCALE ( N Engl J Med , 2015) with SURMOUNT-4 (…
|
+30 | 34 | 29k | 13mo |
|
Coming back to: Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals
Prediction intervals and why they are more honest than confidence intervals Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Comparing SURMOUNT-OSA ( N Engl J Med , 2024)…
|
2 | 65 | 22mo | |
|
Semaglutide half-life: where the 165 to 184 hour figure comes from
Semaglutide half-life: where the 165 to 184 hour figure comes from — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing FLOW ( N Engl J Med , 2024) with STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021) and…
|
+128 | 145 | 3k | 4mo |
|
Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation
On the subject in the title: Conference abstracts as evidence: the weakest common citation Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022). Please read it before…
|
+1 | 5 | 2k | 9mo |