Post #2 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit. 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. Two people can…
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Why an oral GLP-1 agonist is a formulation achievement more than a chemistry one — one year on
A follow-up question about oral GLP-1 agonist that I did not know to ask the first time.
The earlier thread answered what I asked. What I should have asked is below, and I think it is the one that matters.
Post #2 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
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.
Two people can read the same figure differently here and both be reasonable.
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.
Noting that the question and the thing people usually mean by it are different.
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.
Worth separating two things that post #4 runs together.
PIONEER programme is phase 3 for oral semaglutide. The trials cover multiple indications and durations. Reading them requires attention to which trial is which because they are not all the same question.
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.
Not a conclusion. A place to stand while looking for one.
The class is broadening fast enough that anything written here about which orals exist is dated within a year. The mechanisms and the formulation constraints age much more slowly.
Taking post #6 at face value and following it one step further.
Trial adherence in an oral trial with strict administration requirements is genuinely worse than trial-published data often suggests. That is why the exposure variability in oral formulations is mentioned repeatedly in the discussions here.
Genuinely open to being wrong about this one.
Quietly grateful for the plain phrasing. Not every thread gets that.
Research-use-only oral material is not a licensed tablet and there is no reason to assume it carries a functioning absorption-enhancement system at all. The formulation is most of the product here.
That has held every time I have looked, which is not the same as always.
Answering the question post #11 raises rather than the one it answers.
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.
That holds for the case as described. Change the assumptions and it may not.
The arithmetic in post #11 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.
PIONEER 6 was a cardiovascular safety trial for oral semaglutide, not an efficacy trial. Non-inferiority for safety was demonstrated. The point estimates favoured the drug but the trial was not designed to establish benefit.
I would be interested in a counterexample if anyone has one.
The absorption enhancer in the licensed oral product works by transiently raising local gastric pH and promoting absorption across the mucosa. It is the reason the fasting and water-volume instructions are specific rather than cautious.
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.
The honest answer is that it depends, and here is what it depends on.
Adding the measurement that post #16 says would settle it.
Timing consistency matters more for oral dosing than for weekly injection, because absorption depends on the state of the stomach and the state of the stomach varies through the day.
Take the reasoning and check the arithmetic; I do not always get it right.
Coming back to post #16, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
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.
If it helps: the failure mode here is usually boring rather than dramatic.
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.
Adding a source would improve this post and I do not have one to hand.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Why oral semaglutide needs an absorption enhancer at all — one year on
Why oral semaglutide needs an absorption enhancer at all — one year on — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Reading back through what has been written here…
|
+11 | 15 | 17k | 24d |
|
Why oral semaglutide needs an absorption enhancer at all — what changed since
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Why oral semaglutide needs an absorption enhancer at all — what changed since What changes if the standard account of oral semaglutide is wrong? I…
|
2 | 61k | 14mo | |
|
About the Oral incretins category
Oral semaglutide, orforglipron and the absorption problem. PIONEER and OASIS data. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author…
|
4 | 6.2k | 20d | |
|
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 |
|
Dose numbers for oral formulations are not comparable to injectable ones — a second dataset
Dose numbers for oral formulations are not comparable to injectable ones — a second dataset Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Posting a small dataset on Dose…
|
+48 | 52 | 59k | 18mo |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
PIONEER 6 cardiovascular safety, read as a safety trial rather than an efficacy one — does this still hold?
PIONEER 6 cardiovascular safety, read as a safety trial rather than an efficacy one — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Posting a…
|
+23 | 27 | 4.8k | 22mo |
|
About the Oral incretins category
Oral semaglutide, orforglipron and the absorption problem. PIONEER and OASIS data. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded with its author…
|
4 | 6.2k | 20d | |
|
Why fasting instructions for oral semaglutide are not optional advice — does this still hold?
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Why fasting instructions for oral semaglutide are not optional advice — does this still hold? A methods question rather than a substantive one,…
|
+98 | 106 | 3.1k | 10mo |
|
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 |
|
The SOUL trial and oral semaglutide cardiovascular outcomes
Posting this under the heading it deserves: The SOUL trial and oral semaglutide cardiovascular outcomes Everything below is what sits behind that. Collecting what is known about SOUL trial and oral…
|
2 | 7.1k | 9h |