The Peptide CommonsEst. May 2024
Independent. We sell nothing and are affiliated with no manufacturer or pharmacy. Every moderation action is logged in public
Compounds · Cagrilintide & amylin analogues

The CagriSema phase 2 paper and what a fixed combination buys

DS
d.szymanskiTL3Wiki editor6 Jan 2025#1

Posting this under the heading it deserves: The CagriSema phase 2 paper and what a fixed combination buys Everything below is what sits behind that.

I have seen SURPASS-2 (N Engl J Med, 2021) cited in support of a claim I do not think it supports, twice this month, so I would like to work through what it actually shows.

My reading is that the trial is sound for its own question and is being stretched to answer a different one. I might be wrong about that, which is why this is a topic rather than a correction.

What I would like from this discussion: someone who disagrees with me to say why, with the section of the paper they are relying on.

0 likes 19mo
TD
t.dumitruTL2 Moderator13 Jan 2025#2

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.

0 likes 18mo
EF
endo_fellow_rkTL3Endocrinology fellow18 Jan 2025#3
t.dumitru, post #2: 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. Go to post

Historical amylin analogues: pramlintide was the only long-acting amylin analogue licensed for some time and its poor adherence was a known limitation. A weekly formulation addresses that practical barrier.

7 likes in reply to #2 18mo
RE
r.ekstromTL2 Moderator22 Jan 2025#4
endo_fellow_rk, post #3: Historical amylin analogues: pramlintide was the only long-acting amylin analogue licensed for some time and its poor adherence was a known limitation. A weekly formulation addresses that practical barrier. Go to post

Reading the phase 2 paper: it establishes tolerability and efficacy in a selected population on a defined dose escalation. It does not establish the lowest effective dose or the durability over years.

17 likes in reply to #3 18mo
CB
c.bakkerTL2 Moderator27 Jan 2025#5

Gastric emptying: both amylin and GLP-1 slow it, through partly overlapping but distinct mechanisms. Whether the slowing at a higher magnitude produces disproportionate nausea or is tolerable is a question phase 3 exists to answer.

0 likes 18mo
MB
m.brobergTL2 Moderator31 Jan 2025#6

The dosing interval: cagrilintide's half-life is roughly 7 to 8 days, suitable for weekly dosing. The pharmacokinetics are the reason the dosing schedule makes sense.

1 like 18mo
SL
s.leclercTL4 Moderator3 Feb 2025#7
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.

I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.

The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient.

11 likes 18mo
MI
m.ibarraTL2 Moderator7 Feb 2025#8
d.szymanski, post #1: Posting this under the heading it deserves: The CagriSema phase 2 paper and what a fixed combination buys Everything below is what sits behind that. I have seen SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) cited in support of a claim I do not think it supports, twice this month, so I would like to work through what it actually shows. My reading is… Go to post

Coming back to post #6, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

The CagriSema phase 2 paper: a fixed combination of the two components in one weekly injection. The trade-off of a fixed combination is that you cannot titrate the components independently and you cannot attribute effect to one component from a combination trial.

24 likes in reply to #1 18mo
AF
a.friskTL2 Moderator11 Feb 2025#9

What is genuinely unknown about long-term amylin agonism: real-world response rates, whether effect is durable with continued use, whether satiety adaptation occurs over months or years, safety profile in populations not enrolled in the trials.

0 likes 18mo
PM
p.mbekiTL2 Moderator14 Feb 2025 · edited#10

Nausea profile of amylin analogues: the historical agent pramlintide required multiple daily doses and had a difficult tolerability profile. A weekly formulation is a substantially different proposition and data from that is more relevant than data from pramlintide.

3 likes 17mo
NA
n.achebeTL2 Moderator17 Feb 2025#11

Cagrilintide molecular characteristics: it is a synthetic amylin analogue, substituted to prevent the amyloidogenicity of human amylin. The sequence is short and analytically straightforward to confirm by LC-MS.

1 like 17mo
JV
j.vandermolenTL3Regular21 Feb 2025#12

For anyone arriving from a search: the marked solution above is the direct answer, and the replies underneath it add the caveats that make it safe to use.

0 likes 17mo
BC
b.correiaTL2 Moderator24 Feb 2025#13
endo_fellow_rk, post #3: Historical amylin analogues: pramlintide was the only long-acting amylin analogue licensed for some time and its poor adherence was a known limitation. A weekly formulation addresses that practical barrier. Go to post

Worth separating two things that post #9 runs together.

Is synergy the right word for the combination data? A phase 2 trial cannot establish whether effects are synergistic or additive. Synergy is a mechanistic claim that requires a designed experiment to support it. The combination works, but the mechanism is unsettled.

22 likes in reply to #3 17mo
BS
buffer_shiftTL1Member27 Feb 2025 · edited#14

Cagrilintide alone is discussed less than in combination because the published data is almost entirely from combination trials. The phase 2 combination data was consistent with more effect than either component alone, but phase 2 cannot establish whether that is synergy or simply additivity.

10 likes 17mo
SD
st.dialloTL2 Moderator2 Mar 2025#15

Amylin signalling is distinct from GLP-1 signalling. Amylin slows gastric emptying and promotes satiety through a different receptor and different neural pathways. The hypothesis behind combination is two complementary satiety mechanisms with one injection.

3 likes 17mo
H
HHidalgoTL2Member5 Mar 2025#16
a.frisk, post #9: What is genuinely unknown about long-term amylin agonism: real-world response rates, whether effect is durable with continued use, whether satiety adaptation occurs over months or years, safety profile in populations not enrolled in the trials. Go to post

Picking up post #13: that is the part I would want checked first.

Cagrilintide molecular characteristics: it is a synthetic amylin analogue, substituted to prevent the amyloidogenicity of human amylin. The sequence is short and analytically straightforward to confirm by LC-MS.

0 likes in reply to #9 17mo
EF
e.ferreiraTL3Regular8 Mar 2025#17

Nausea profile of amylin analogues: the historical agent pramlintide required multiple daily doses and had a difficult tolerability profile. A weekly formulation is a substantially different proposition and data from that is more relevant than data from pramlintide.

30 likes 17mo
K
KAnderssonTL3Regular11 Mar 2025#18

What is genuinely unknown about long-term amylin agonism: real-world response rates, whether effect is durable with continued use, whether satiety adaptation occurs over months or years, safety profile in populations not enrolled in the trials.

15 likes 17mo
TV
t.verhoevenTL2 Moderator14 Mar 2025#19

I read post #17 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Amylin signalling is distinct from GLP-1 signalling. Amylin slows gastric emptying and promotes satiety through a different receptor and different neural pathways. The hypothesis behind combination is two complementary satiety mechanisms with one injection.

6 likes 16mo
LC
l.chevalierTL3Regular17 Mar 2025#20
c.bakker, post #5: Gastric emptying: both amylin and GLP-1 slow it, through partly overlapping but distinct mechanisms. Whether the slowing at a higher magnitude produces disproportionate nausea or is tolerable is a question phase 3 exists to answer. Go to post

For anyone arriving from searches on "amylin agonist": this subcategory discusses published clinical evidence and what it does and does not establish. It does not endorse or recommend the compounds discussed.

1 like in reply to #5 16mo
AN
a.nwosuTL2 Moderator20 Mar 2025#21

Is synergy the right word for the combination data? A phase 2 trial cannot establish whether effects are synergistic or additive. Synergy is a mechanistic claim that requires a designed experiment to support it. The combination works, but the mechanism is unsettled.

0 likes 16mo
AB
a.batistaTL2 Moderator23 Mar 2025#22
e.ferreira, post #17: Nausea profile of amylin analogues: the historical agent pramlintide required multiple daily doses and had a difficult tolerability profile. A weekly formulation is a substantially different proposition and data from that is more relevant than data from pramlintide. Go to post

I read post #20 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

Historical amylin analogues: pramlintide was the only long-acting amylin analogue licensed for some time and its poor adherence was a known limitation. A weekly formulation addresses that practical barrier.

0 likes in reply to #17 16mo
AZ
a.zamoraTL226 Mar 2025#23
DT
d.tammTL2 Moderator28 Mar 2025#24

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.

18 likes 16mo
EV
e.vargaTL2 Moderator31 Mar 2025 · edited#25

Picking up post #22: that is the part I would want checked first.

Cagrilintide alone is discussed less than in combination because the published data is almost entirely from combination trials. The phase 2 combination data was consistent with more effect than either component alone, but phase 2 cannot establish whether that is synergy or simply additivity.

0 likes 16mo
RA
r.aldana_pharmdTL4Pharmacist3 Apr 2025#26
a.zamora, post #23: post #22 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit. Reading the phase 2 paper: it establishes tolerability and efficacy in a selected population on a defined dose escalation. It does not establish the lowest effective dose or the durability over years. Go to post

Coming back to post #24, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

The CagriSema phase 2 paper: a fixed combination of the two components in one weekly injection. The trade-off of a fixed combination is that you cannot titrate the components independently and you cannot attribute effect to one component from a combination trial.

1 like in reply to #23 16mo
AN
a.novakTL2 Moderator6 Apr 2025#27
s.leclerc, post #7: I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological. The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient. Go to post

Gastric emptying: both amylin and GLP-1 slow it, through partly overlapping but distinct mechanisms. Whether the slowing at a higher magnitude produces disproportionate nausea or is tolerable is a question phase 3 exists to answer.

12 likes in reply to #7 16mo
BN
bench_notesTL4 Moderator8 Apr 2025#28
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.

The dosing interval: cagrilintide's half-life is roughly 7 to 8 days, suitable for weekly dosing. The pharmacokinetics are the reason the dosing schedule makes sense.

25 likes 16mo
BP
baseline_peakTL2Member11 Apr 2025#29
a.zamora, post #23: post #22 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit. Reading the phase 2 paper: it establishes tolerability and efficacy in a selected population on a defined dose escalation. It does not establish the lowest effective dose or the durability over years. Go to post

This follows post #26 rather than contradicting it.

For anyone arriving from searches on "amylin agonist": this subcategory discusses published clinical evidence and what it does and does not establish. It does not endorse or recommend the compounds discussed.

5 likes in reply to #23 16mo
BN
b.nwosuTL2 Moderator14 Apr 2025#30
d.szymanski, post #1: Posting this under the heading it deserves: The CagriSema phase 2 paper and what a fixed combination buys Everything below is what sits behind that. I have seen SURPASS-2 ( N Engl J Med , 2021) cited in support of a claim I do not think it supports, twice this month, so I would like to work through what it actually shows. My reading is… Go to post

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.

13 likes in reply to #1 15mo