The evidence status here should be stated in the first line of any post about it rather than the last. Everything is phase 2 or earlier, and a reader arriving from a search will not know that unless somebody says so.
26 likes 19mo
Compounds · Retatrutide · continued
What we do not know about retatrutide, listed explicitly posts 31–60
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
A theoretical mass for retatrutide is not published in the peer-reviewed literature in a form worth quoting. A report should state the mass observed on the instrument rather than assert agreement with a figure nobody can check.
0 likes 19mo
Narrowing post #30, because the general version has more than one answer.
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
That is what the documentation says. What happens in practice is usually close.
4 likes 19mo
an.zamora, post #26: Retatrutide is investigational. Material obtained outside a clinical trial is research-use-only by definition, is not approved for human use, and carries no assurance about its identity or content beyond whatever independent testing you commission yourself. Adding the caveat now so it does not have to be extracted later. Go to post
Everything in post #32 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
The reasoning is more useful than the number, which is why I have shown it.
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
19 likes 19mo
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
That much is documented. The rest is how I have interpreted it.
0 likes 19mo
y.adeyemi, post #24: Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either. Go to post
Post #34 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
I would put a moderate confidence on that and no more.
h.frisk, post #33: Narrowing post #30, because the general version has more than one answer. Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either. That… Go to post
I read post #36 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
m.agyeman, post #12: Noted, and I have changed what I was going to do on the strength of it. Go to post
Confirming post #38 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
I keep a log of this specifically because memory is unreliable about it.
I had written a reply contradicting post #36 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
One case, stated as one case.
27 likes 19mo
Post #37 and I disagree about the size of the effect, not about the direction.
Anyone deciding on the basis of what is published should know that what is published is a phase 2 programme and some pharmacokinetics. That is a genuinely early evidence base and this page will say so until it changes.
Anyone with a larger sample, please post it.
20 likes 19mo
BBramley, post #17: Picking up post #16: that is the part I would want checked first. Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either. Small point,… Go to post
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
Worth separating two things that post #41 runs together.
Mass and identity: a report on retatrutide should state the mass detected by LC-MS, not assume a theoretical mass. The theoretical mass is not published in peer-reviewed literature for retatrutide at present.
27 likes 19mo
k.batista, post #37: Post #34 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different. Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established… Go to post
What we do not know about retatrutide, listed explicitly: long-term safety, real-world response rates, the dose response in diverse populations, whether the heart-rate signal persists or attenuates, durability of effect on withdrawal, efficacy in comorbidities beyond obesity.
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
Not a strong opinion, just a consistent one.
4 likes 19mo
Post #45 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
Worth saying I have only my own numbers here, and n is small.
0 likes 19mo
l.cabrera, post #46: What we do not know about retatrutide, listed explicitly: long-term safety, real-world response rates, the dose response in diverse populations, whether the heart-rate signal persists or attenuates, durability of effect on withdrawal, efficacy in comorbidities beyond obesity. Go to post
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
One more caveat and then I will stop qualifying: the sample selected itself.
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
Not a conclusion. A place to stand while looking for one.
29 likes 19mo
vial_desk, post #15: Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either. Go to post
On post #50 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Retatrutide is investigational. Anything obtained outside a trial is by definition research-use-only material with no human-use authorisation. This site will state that plainly rather than winking at it.
If anyone has run this properly I would rather read that than my own guess.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Post #52 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
If it helps: the failure mode here is usually boring rather than dramatic.
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
0 likes 18mo
taper_table, post #11: Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either. Go to post
Helpful, and short, which on this subject is harder than long.
Confirming post #55 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
Written quickly, so the reasoning may be tighter than the wording.
5 likes 18mo
I had written a reply contradicting post #54 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.
I have written this out at length because the short version keeps being misread.
14 likes 18mo
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others.
It took me longer than it should have to see that.
m.marchetti, post #30: Heart rate increased in a dose-dependent way in the phase 2 work. That is not a footnote — it is one of the specific things phase 3 exists to characterise, and it is why this subcategory is written more cautiously than the others. Go to post
Nausea and vomiting were dose-related in the phase 2 work, as they are throughout this class. What is not established is whether the tolerability profile differs from the dual agonists at equipotent effect, because equipotence has not been established either.