TrialTracker_MD said:

The phase 2 numbers were about 24% mean weight loss at 48 weeks on the top dose, with the curve still descending at the end of the study.

I read this differently from TrialTracker_MD, on substance rather than tone. The "earlier than weight loss explains" argument is weaker than this thread makes it sound. Blood pressure and inflammatory markers move fast and are downstream of early weight loss, so the mechanism is not as cleanly separable as the summaries imply.

Worth separating that from retatrutide, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. For anyone tracking the class: GLP-1 alone gets you appetite, GLP-1 plus GIP adds tolerability and lipid handling, and adding glucagon adds expenditure and liver-fat reduction. Each addition also adds a receptor system that can generate side effects.

Dr.NateNeph said:

The "earlier than weight loss explains" argument is weaker than this thread makes it sound.

NNT calculation for cardiovascular risk clinical endpoints: NNT = 1/ARR (absolute risk reduction).

From SELECT trial: MACE at 39 months — 6.5% semaglutide vs 8.0% placebo. ARR = 1.5%. NNT = 67 over 3.3 years.

Compare to established therapies:

These NNTs are clinically meaningful and comparable to accepted cardiovascular interventions.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

What the phase 2 dropout pattern implies about how the phase 3 tolerability will read?

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

Rereading it with the dropout table open changed my view. I still think it is the most interesting molecule in the pipeline; I no longer think the 24% is the number that will end up on a label.