Coming back to: Nausea profile of amylin analogues compared with GLP-1 agonists posts 31–54
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Building on post #30 rather than restating 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.
Adding a reference point for Nausea profile of amylin analogues. Mine is a single case, collected without controls, and I am posting the method alongside it so it can be discounted appropriately.
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.
None of the above is medical advice and I am not qualified to give any.
Taking post #35 at face value and following it one step further.
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.
If anyone has run this properly I would rather read that than my own guess.
I read post #35 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
The version of Nausea profile of amylin analogues that circulates here is a simplification of a simplification. It is not wrong, but it has lost the conditions under which it holds, and those conditions are where the interesting cases live.
Agreed on Nausea profile of amylin analogues, with one qualification that I think matters. The reasoning holds for the case as described. Change the starting assumption and it does not, and the starting assumption is the part nobody states.
That is clearer than the version I had in my head. Thank you.
Post #38 and I disagree about the size of the effect, not about the direction.
Anyone submitting this for independent testing should say in the submission that it is an amylin analogue rather than an incretin. Method selection differs and a default incretin gradient is not necessarily the right one.
Happy to expand any of that if it is the useful part.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Two sentences on Nausea profile of amylin analogues and then I will stop, because the rest is speculation and the thread is better without mine.
What is documented is narrow. What is inferred from it is broad. The gap between them is where every argument here lives.
Post #44 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
My understanding of Nausea profile of amylin analogues is a few years old and may have been superseded. If it has been, I would genuinely like to know rather than keep repeating it.
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.
Where I would look next, rather than where I would stop.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Whatever the answer on Nausea profile of amylin analogues turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, invite the correction.
The version of Nausea profile of amylin analogues that I was taught turned out to be a teaching simplification. Useful, and not true in the way I had assumed it was.
Cagrilintide is a long-acting amylin analogue, which puts it in a different mechanistic family from the incretin agonists it is usually discussed alongside. Amylin signalling contributes to satiety through a distinct pathway.
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.
Post #50 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.
Comparing an amylin analogue to an incretin agonist on weight change alone misses that they were developed to be used together rather than instead of each other.
That is the version I would defend. It is not the version I started with.
Adding the measurement that post #53 says would settle it.
One more thing on Nausea profile of amylin analogues that took me far too long to see: the two figures people quote are not measuring the same quantity. Once you notice that, the apparent contradiction disappears.
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Amylin analogue mechanism: satiety signalling separate from GLP-1
Amylin analogue mechanism: satiety signalling separate from GLP-1 — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Trying to work out what would count as evidence on amylin analogue…
|
+128 | 142 | 38k | 13mo |
|
Why cagrilintide alone is discussed so much less than in combination
Why cagrilintide alone is discussed so much less than in combination I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Collecting what is known about cagrilintide alone…
|
+93 | 108 | 35k | 16mo |
|
About the Cagrilintide & amylin analogues category
Long-acting amylin analogues alone and in combination. Mechanism, published data, and the open questions. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is…
|
4 | 1.8k | 11mo | |
|
Cagrilintide molecular characteristics and analytical considerations
Cagrilintide molecular characteristics and analytical considerations — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A methods question rather than a substantive one, about cagrilintide…
|
4 | 41k | 12mo | |
|
Second pass at: Cagrilintide's dosing interval and the pharmacokinetics behind it
On the subject in the title: Second pass at: Cagrilintide's dosing interval and the pharmacokinetics behind it Working notes rather than a conclusion. A comparison question rather than a question about one…
|
+2 | 6 | 2.4k | 7mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags effect size, cagrilintide, cagrisema
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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. Posting a small dataset on SELECT. It is mine, it is…
|
4 | 1.3k | 1mo | |
|
Revisiting: Why tirzepatide titration schedules have more steps than semaglutide's
Revisiting: Why tirzepatide titration schedules have more steps than semaglutide's Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I would like to know what people here…
|
+89 | 101 | 32k | 8mo |
|
What a statistical analysis plan adds that the paper does not
What a statistical analysis plan adds that the paper does not — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Statistical analysis plan, and specifically the version…
|
2 | 6.6k | 10h | |
|
Blinding yourself: practical methods and their limits
On the subject in the title: Blinding yourself: practical methods and their limits Working notes rather than a conclusion. A methods question rather than a substantive one, about blinding yourself. Everyone…
|
+40 | 44 | 33k | 5d |
|
Run-in periods and the population they select
On the subject in the title: Run-in periods and the population they select Working notes rather than a conclusion. An honest uncertainty about run-in periods rather than a disguised assertion. I do not know…
|
+130 | 142 | 7.3k | 1mo |