24.2% at 48 weeks vs 28.7% Phase 3 - efficacy estimand puzzle?

The 32-person trial is almost certainly not powered for weight change. That still doesn't explain why results aren't posted.

Knee OA trial at 445 comlpeted and I still can't find posted weight results. That's the one that bugs me.

I think the Phase 2 24.2% gets misread because it's efficacy estimand, not raw completers. The company's up-to-28.7% is from four Phase 3 trials and not peer-reviewed yet.

Different populations, different baseline BMIs, and different handling of discontinuations could close some of the gap, but I'd still want the actual tables before treating 28.7% as any kind of real-world ceiling. And the 46-person postmenopausal trial is too small to settle that question.

Same for the 32-person Chinese trial, honestly.

The glucagon piece is interesting but it makes glucose interpretation messier, so I get why the smaller trials might have been staged as safety first.

Agreed on estimand. The glucagon piece can affect glucose too. Did any completed trial pre-specify fasting glucose endpoints?

NCT06039826 being postmenopausal and only 46 makes it a mechanistic side quest, not a Phase 3 preview.

Results often lag on CT.gov even after completion, especially for smaller company-sponsored trials. But NCT05931367 at 445 is hard to hand-wave. If it was knee OA, they may have been focused on joint symptoms and weight as secondary, which would explain why there's no weight headline floating around.

Still doesn't mean the 28.7% number is bogus - just that it comes from a different set of four Phase 3 trials. I'd rather see the full tables than argue over top-line percentages. The 32-person and 46-person trials probably won't answer the efficacy estimand question either.

Estimand talk always makes me squint. Give me the discontinuation table and I’ll happily shut up. Until then, top-line percentages feel like comparing different recipes.

If the 445-trial posted tables and weight sat low in the hierarchy, that’s a diary entry, not a scandal. Still check CT.gov monthly. Sometimes sponsors update at quarter-end.

A 32-person sample can’t settle much beyond ‘signal or noise.’ I’d treat it as a footnote, not a preview. Same with the 46-person one.

If fasting glucose was pre-specified, it’d be in the SAP. Did anyone actually pull the protocol? I’m too lazy to hunt PDFs today.

Small-company trials do lag, but 445 completed is a lot of silence. My guess: secondary endpoints got buried, or the posting person moved on.

Different baselines, different handling of dropouts, different timing. That gap could shrink or grow. I just want the actual n’s per visit.

Agreed, no single number is a ceiling. Four Phase 3 trials plus one Phase 2 estimand is apples and oranges. Show me the mixed-model outputs.

Trial math is above most folks' pay grade. Worth knowing before you compare anything: the closest thing people actually have is 48 weeks of logs, a waist down 3 inches, and a scale that stalled twice.

Yeah, the n=1 route saved my sanity. My weird reversal was weekends: I used to spike 3 lbs by Monday, then I started weighing Friday and Monday and realized it was mostly salty takeout, not real gain. Now I keep Friday as my official numbr and Monday is just data. Are you tracking waist monthly or just scale?

The trial stuff is way over my head, but sleep is the hidden variable for me. Under 6 hours and my appetite is a monster; 7.5+ and I can actually stop at one serving. I tested it for 4 weeks and the low-sleep weeks averaged 1.2 lbs higher. Not saying that explains your estimand thing, but it explains my stalls.

Honestly, I’d stop chasing trial percentages—they don’t change my Tuesday. I tracked 24 weeks: 10k steps daily plus 2x lifting, lost 9 lbs, then 3 lbs whooshed off after a vacation where I ate more. My best losses happened on weeks I wasn’t 'perfect.' What are you actually changing in your own routine this month?

I didn't believe anything was changing until my old Levi's 541s went from leaving red marks on my hips to actually needing a belt around week 14. The scale had been stuck in the same 3-pound range for almost five weeks, which made me want to throw it out the window, but my waist tape said I'd lost 2.25 inches and my work polo went from pulling across my back to hanging straight.

The weird part was that the week I finally dropped 4 pounds on the scale, my waist didn't budge at all. Bodies are little liars with their own timeline.

What helped was taking a photo every Sunday morning in the same mirror spot wearing the same joggers, plus measuring at the belly button and the widest part of my hips.

I also started logging how my rings felt, because my fingers were the first place I noticed water fluctuations. Around week 20 I had a stretch where I ate mostly the same breakfast and lunch, walked 25 minutes after dinner, and hit a protein goal that kept me from raiding the pantry at 9 pm.

That's when the waist numbers started moving again, even though the scale looked like it was on strike. I'm not saying ignore the trial data, but for me the closet and the tape measure told a much less dramtic and more honest story than any single weigh-in.

The surprise was that my shoe size didn't change at all, but my watch band went down two notches. If you're in a stall, try the jeans-and-tape combo for a month before you decide nothing is happening.

My scale is a drama queen; my jeans are the friend who tells me the truth.