Taking post #29 at face value and following it one step further.
C-cell question is worth one more sentence than it usually gets, and the sentence is the one about how the number was arrived at.
0 likes 23mo
Compounds · Semaglutide · continued
The C-cell question: rodent findings and their human context — what changed since posts 31–60
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
t.tulloch, post #30: Following this. I have the same question and no better information than the first post. Go to post
Trying to state the c-cell question position in a way that someone who disagrees would recognise as fair, because I do not think the version in this thread passes that test.
The 165 to 184 hour half-life range gets quoted as a fixed number. It is a range across a studied population, and individual clearance varies enough that a person's own steady state may be reached earlier or later than the population average implies.
Worth one more sentence than it usually gets.
7 likes 23mo
I read post #32 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
Cardiovascular data in people without diabetes is the specific contribution of SELECT, and it is worth being precise that the enrolled population had established cardiovascular disease. That is not the same as the general population and the result should not be quoted as though it were.
17 likes 23mo
vial_desk, post #29: On alcohol: the labelling does not contraindicate it, but it raises gastric irritation risk and semaglutide already does that. There is no published interaction study and the conservative position is to limit it if you are titrating or if gastrointestinal symptoms are troublesome. Go to post
Distinguishing three things in the c-cell question discussion that keep getting used interchangeably: the observation, the proposed mechanism, and the recommendation that gets attached to both.
j.erdogan, post #2: The thing about c-cell question that took me longest to accept is that a plausible mechanism is not evidence of an effect. It is a reason to look, not a result. Go to post
The strongest argument against my own position on c-cell question, stated as well as I can state it, since nobody else has yet.
I will take the caveat as seriously as the claim, which is the point of putting it there.
4 likes 23mo
Coming back to post #36, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
The C-cell question: semaglutide triggered medullary thyroid carcinoma in rodent toxicology studies. A signal in rodents does not automatically appear in humans, but it is the reason the compound is contraindicated in people with personal or family history of medullary thyroid carcinoma or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2.
12 likes 23mo
On c-cell question the community has more anecdote than the confidence in this thread implies, and I include my own contribution in that.
18 likes 23mo
m.dalgaard, post #7: On the "does it stop working" question: tolerance in the pharmacological sense is not what the withdrawal trials show. What they show is that the effect persists while treatment continues and reverses when it stops, which is a different finding with different implications. Go to post
Where I part company with post #36, and it is a narrow parting.
The practical version of c-cell question is three sentences long. The rigorous version is three pages and reaches the same conclusion with the conditions attached.
c.chowdhury, post #36: The strongest argument against my own position on c-cell question, stated as well as I can state it, since nobody else has yet. Go to post
Post #38 and I disagree about the size of the effect, not about the direction.
Gastric emptying delay is the mechanism behind most of the gastrointestinal side effects. Slowing the stomach empties it feeds less food into the intestines at a time, which is part of the satiety mechanism but is also why nausea is dose-dependent and titration-dependent.
STEP 1 and STEP 4 are two different questions. The first asks what happens when treatment is added; the second asks what happens when it is withdrawn after a run-in. Quoting the first as evidence about maintenance is the commonest misreading of the programme.
I would put this at better than even and not much better.
0 likes 23mo
MJayawardena, post #44: STEP 1 and STEP 4 are two different questions. The first asks what happens when treatment is added; the second asks what happens when it is withdrawn after a run-in. Quoting the first as evidence about maintenance is the commonest misreading of the programme. I would put this at better than even and not much better. Go to post
On c-cell question: the maintained page in the documentation commons covers the general case with citations and a review date, which is more reliable than any reply here including this one.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
On the injection-day question: the labelling for licensed semaglutide allows the day to be changed provided at least two days separate the two injections. That interval is not arbitrary — it is what stops two doses stacking inside one absorption window.
The uncertainty is in the assumption, not in the calculation.
e.mbeki, post #10: Adding the measurement that post #7 says would settle it. On c-cell question, I would rather understate and be corrected upward than overstate and be quoted. That is a house style here and it is a good one. Go to post
Post #45 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Answering the c-cell question question as asked, then the question I think is meant. As asked: yes, with the qualification below. As meant: it depends on how the first measurement was taken.
Injection site does not appear to matter much for semaglutide exposure. The published comparisons of abdomen, thigh and upper arm found differences small enough to be clinically unimportant, which is not true of every injectable.
A partial answer, offered because a partial answer beats none.
5 likes 22mo
This follows post #48 rather than contradicting it.
Research-use-only semaglutide is not a licensed medicine, is not manufactured to pharmaceutical standards, and is not approved for human use. That is a statement about what it is, not a coded opinion about anything.
14 likes 22mo
Worth separating two things that post #50 runs together.
Offering a way to settle c-cell question rather than another opinion about it. Two measurements, taken the same way, a fortnight apart. If the difference is within the noise, the question was not answerable at this precision.
29 likes 22mo
taper_shift, post #13: Picking up post #12: that is the part I would want checked first. Semaglutide's structure is a modified backbone with a C18 diacid attached through a spacer. The acylation is the reason for the long half-life and it is also the reason a plain sequence comparison against native GLP-1 is misleading about how the molecule behaves. Go to post
Second this, and I would have said it less carefully.
The opalescent appearance in semaglutide solutions is occasionally noted and the mechanism is unclear. It does not appear to correlate with product failure in practice. Visible particles or frank cloudiness is different and would be reason to contact the supplier.
Marking that as an opinion rather than a finding.
20 likes 22mo
r.ilunga, post #45: On c-cell question: the maintained page in the documentation commons covers the general case with citations and a review date, which is more reliable than any reply here including this one. Go to post
On post #55 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
The C-cell question: semaglutide triggered medullary thyroid carcinoma in rodent toxicology studies. A signal in rodents does not automatically appear in humans, but it is the reason the compound is contraindicated in people with personal or family history of medullary thyroid carcinoma or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2.
The bit of c-cell question that nobody enjoys is that the answer changes depending on what you are trying to decide with it. Say what the decision is and the thread will converge.
5 likes 22mo
Gallbladder events appear in the labelling for this class and are more common with larger, faster weight reduction. The mechanism is not specific to the drug — rapid weight loss by any route carries the same association.
The confident version of this sentence would be wrong, so here is the hedged one.
5 likes 22mo
m.vukovic, post #8: C-cell question: I have looked for the primary source twice and failed twice. Either it does not exist or it is somewhere I do not know to look, and I would like to know which. Go to post
I read the earlier replies on c-cell question twice before writing this, because I had assumed the opposite and wanted to be sure I was disagreeing with what was said rather than what I expected.