Will reta make sema and tirz obsolete? — my results so far

Dr.NutriCornell said:

It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.

I would rather people stopped quoting the 24% as if it were a licensed outcome. It is a phase 2 result in a few hundred participants with no cardiovascular endpoint and no long-term safety data, and this board has a habit of treating pipeline numbers as settled.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.

LibrarianMeg said:

I would rather people stopped quoting the 24% as if it were a licensed outcome.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.

Following on from tampaLisa73 — and this may be the naive question:

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.