I have been following the oral non-peptide data since phase 2 and I am trying to work out how much of the enthusiasm here is about efficacy and how much is about not having to inject.
Phase 2: about 14.7% at 36 weeks on 45mg, GI adverse events broadly in line with the injectables, no food-timing requirement.
What I actually want to know is whether a non-peptide oral agonist can match injectable exposure in practice, or whether the convenience is bought with a lower ceiling.
If the honest answer is that nobody knows, that is a useful answer and I would rather have it.
Answering the narrow version, because the broad one does not have a single answer. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.
Dr.ObesityLA said:Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.
Agreeing with Dr.ObesityLA, and the qualification matters more than the agreement. Orforglipron is a small molecule rather than a peptide, which is the whole point: no SNAC absorption enhancer, no fasting window, no cold chain, and oral bioavailability in the tens of percent instead of around one. Phase 2 put it near 14.7% weight loss at 36 weeks on the top dose with a side-effect profile that looks like the injectables.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsJessicaM_2024 said:I have been following the oral non-peptide data since phase 2 and I am trying to work out how much of the enthusiasm here is about efficacy and how…
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.