Dose numbers for oral formulations are not comparable to injectable ones — a second dataset posts 31–53
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Dose numbers for oral formulations are not comparable to injectable ones. The 14 mg oral dose is not equivalent to any injectable dose in the traditional comparison sense. They are different formulations with different pharmacokinetics and cannot be put on the same scale.
That is all the detail I have. Someone else will have more.
This follows post #32 rather than contradicting it.
SNAC is the sodium N-(8-[2-hydroxybenzoyl]amino) caprylate, an absorption enhancer that transiently raises local pH in the stomach and promotes gastric mucosal absorption. Without it, oral bioavailability of semaglutide would be too low for clinically useful dosing.
I had written a reply contradicting post #34 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Why administration conditions matter for oral semaglutide and not for injectables: the oral formulation depends on a transient pH effect in the stomach. Anything that changes gastric pH or transit time changes absorption. Food does both.
Picking up post #36: that is the part I would want checked first.
Why an oral formulation is a formulation achievement: the molecule is the same but the tablet is novel. Getting a peptide across the gastric epithelium at usable bioavailability is a chemistry problem, not a dose problem.
Post #36 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.
On variability: the between-person spread in exposure for oral semaglutide is wide enough that two people on the same dose can have quite different plasma concentrations. That is inherent to the absorption route.
Noted, and I have changed what I was going to do on the strength of it.
Answering the question post #39 raises rather than the one it answers.
Oral semaglutide's bioavailability is low and variable, which is why the dose numbers are an order of magnitude different from the injectable. That is a formulation consequence and not a difference in potency.
I would hold that lightly until someone with a larger sample weighs in.
The arithmetic in post #39 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.
PIONEER 6 is the cardiovascular outcome trial for oral semaglutide and it enrolled a diabetes population at high cardiovascular risk. Quoting it outside that population is an extrapolation.
That is the practical version. The rigorous version is longer and says the same thing.
Missed doses behave differently for a daily oral than for a weekly injection. With a short interval you are near a trough rather than perturbing a slowly moving average, and the labelling reflects that.
Following, with nothing to contribute beyond having asked the same thing elsewhere.
Adding the measurement that post #43 says would settle it.
Taking the oral product with more water than instructed reduces absorption rather than helping it. That is counter-intuitive and it is one of the few dosing instructions in this field with a clear pharmacokinetic basis.
Adding it in case it saves somebody the afternoon it cost me.
Anyone comparing published oral and injectable efficacy should check whether the comparison is within one trial or across two. Across two, the populations differ and the comparison is weak.
Oral bioavailability is variable between people. Some people absorb well; others absorb poorly. That inter-individual variation is larger than with injectables and is one reason the trial data for oral formulations receives different treatment.
The thirty-minute wait before eating is not conservatism. Food in the stomach materially reduces absorption of the oral product, and the instruction exists because the pharmacokinetic studies measured how much.
Tablet integrity matters more than people expect for a formulation that depends on an absorption enhancer released at a particular place. Splitting or crushing is not a dose adjustment; it is a different product.
Oral versus injectable exposure: comparing a 14 mg oral dose with a 0.5 mg injectable dose is comparing apples to a different fruit. The oral bioavailability is low enough that dose numbers are an order of magnitude different and not directly comparable.
The interesting part of this is the exception, and I do not understand the exception.
The gastrointestinal tolerability profile of the oral formulation is broadly similar in character to the injectable, which supports the effects being systemic rather than local irritation.
Written from notes rather than memory, which is why the numbers are specific.
This follows post #50 rather than contradicting it.
Dose equivalence between oral and injectable formulations is not a simple conversion and no published factor should be used as one. The two were developed and titrated separately.
This topic was referenced in
- Oral semaglutide bioavailability and its variability between peopleCompounds › Oral incretins · 48 replies
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Orforglipron as a non-peptide: what changes when the molecule is small
On the subject in the title: Orforglipron as a non-peptide: what changes when the molecule is small Working notes rather than a conclusion. What changes if the standard account of orforglipron is wrong? I ask…
|
+26 | 30 | 26k | 23mo |
|
Why oral semaglutide needs an absorption enhancer at all
Why oral semaglutide needs an absorption enhancer at all I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Reading back through what has been written here about oral…
|
+59 | 65 | 61k | 7mo |
|
SNAC and the mechanism of oral peptide absorption — the long version
SNAC and the mechanism of oral peptide absorption — the long version Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Question about what the published evidence for this…
|
+32 | 36 | 6.8k | 16mo |
|
Why fasting instructions for oral semaglutide are not optional advice
Why fasting instructions for oral semaglutide are not optional advice I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Fasting instructions for oral semaglutide, from…
|
+70 | 74 | 1.1k | 23d |
|
Oral versus injectable exposure: comparing apples to a different fruit — a second dataset
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Oral versus injectable exposure: comparing apples to a different fruit — a second dataset Everything below is what sits behind that. Something about Oral versus…
|
+27 | 31 | 17k | 25d |
Related topics — sharing the tags randomised trial, orforglipron, PIONEER programme
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Why retatrutide discussion here is more cautious than elsewhere — one year on
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Why retatrutide discussion here is more cautious than elsewhere — one year on Two things I would like separated before anyone answers on…
|
+92 | 97 | 3.6k | 20h |
|
Second pass at: Orforglipron as a non-peptide: what changes when the molecule is small
Second pass at: Orforglipron as a non-peptide: what changes when the molecule is small Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Posting a small dataset on…
|
2 | 17k | 6h | |
|
Reading SURMOUNT-1 without the press release
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Reading SURMOUNT-1 without the press release Everything below is what sits behind that. What changes if the standard account of reading SURMOUNT-1 without the press…
|
+103 | 121 | 7k | 7mo |
|
Hepatic effects of glucagon receptor agonism: the mechanistic worry
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Hepatic effects of glucagon receptor agonism: the mechanistic worry Everything below is what sits behind that. Something about hepatic effects of glucagon receptor…
|
+51 | 56 | 700 | 22mo |
|
Dose numbers for oral formulations are not comparable to injectable ones
On the subject in the title: Dose numbers for oral formulations are not comparable to injectable ones Working notes rather than a conclusion. Putting the numbers in the first post, because a question about a…
|
+19 | 23 | 39k | 6mo |