One concrete data point for the thread. A quick sanity check on any figure quoted here: is it mean or median, is it intention-to-treat or completers, and what was the comparator. Three questions, and they resolve most disagreements in these threads.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How to read a result like this without either dismissing it or over-reading it, since the summaries all read like press releases?
BethLabQueen said:A quick sanity check on any figure quoted here: is it mean or median, is it intention-to-treat or completers, and what was the comparator.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Relative and absolute effects need reading together. A 20% relative reduction on a high baseline risk is a large absolute benefit; the same relative figure on a low baseline risk is a small one, and press summaries almost always quote the relative number because it is bigger.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsOP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have. That was reassuring rather than otherwise.
DebRD_ATL said:Relative and absolute effects need reading together.
NASH/MAFLD therapeutic landscape and liver and MASH: GLP-1 agonists are emerging as potential first-line NASH therapy. The Phase 2b data for semaglutide showed 59% NASH resolution (vs 17% placebo) with 43% achieving fibrosis improvement[1].
Mechanism: GLP-1R activation reduces hepatic lipogenesis, increases fatty acid oxidation, reduces hepatic inflammation, and may directly reduce hepatic stellate cell activation (fibrosis pathway).
With resmetirom (thyroid hormone receptor agonist) recently approved for NASH, the field is evolving rapidly. Combination approaches (GLP-1 + resmetirom) are being explored.