🍪 The GLP Lounge uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsMASH / Liver DiseaseSemaglutide liver fat quantification — MRI-PDFF data from multiple trials

Semaglutide liver fat quantification — MRI-PDFF data from multiple trials

MASHdoc_SA Tue, Jun 2, 2026 at 9:22 AM 22 replies 672 viewsPage 1 of 5
MASHdoc_SA
Member
456
2,345
Aug 2024
San Antonio, TX
Jun 2, 2026 at 9:22 AM#1

Read the primary source rather than the write-up and the two do not agree, so here is what is actually in it.

The dose-response is real but shallow at the top. Across STEP 1 and STEP 4 the gap between 1.7mg and 2.4mg is a couple of percentage points of body weight on average, and the average is carrying a wide spread — plenty of people at 1.7mg sit above the 2.4mg mean. If a dose is working and tolerable, "working" is the relevant variable, not "maximal".

Where I think it is weakest: the follow-up is short relative to how long people actually take these drugs, so durability is an assumption here rather than a finding.

The narrow version of the question is what the dose-response curve actually looks like above 1.7mg, because the trial means hide how few people account for the extra loss. Practical detail welcome, however dull — the duller the better.

Note on sourcing:
Figures above are from the primary publication rather than the press summary. If a number here disagrees with one you have, post yours and we will work out which of us is reading a secondary source.
13 8TirzTom, TrialTracker_MD, JennaRN and 10 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
DebRD_ATL
Senior Member
1,678
7,890
Feb 2024
Atlanta, GA
Jun 2, 2026 at 9:31 AM#2
MASHdoc_SA said:
The dose-response is real but shallow at the top.

All true, with one condition: that curve is for people who reached the dose on schedule. Anyone who slowed the ladder for tolerability is on a different, flatter curve, and comparing yourself with the published mean will make you feel like a non-responder when you are not.

12 7RegAffairsDC, BiostatsBrad, PeptideSynthNJ and 9 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
pete_manc_UK
Senior Member
1,234
5,678
Mar 2024
Manchester, UK
Jun 2, 2026 at 9:40 AM#3
MASHdoc_SA said:
The dose-response is real but shallow at the top.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The trial means are being read too generously in this thread. STEP populations were selected, supported, and titrated by protocol, and the real-world curves are consistently a few points worse. That difference is not noise, it is what happens when you remove the study infrastructure.

11 6FitDadDave, RunnerRach, TrialNerd_Beth and 8 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards

Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.

Shop Reference Standards
pat_auckland
Member
345
1,567
Jun 2024
Auckland, NZ
Jun 2, 2026 at 9:49 AM#4

Answering the narrow version, because the broad one does not have a single answer. Steady state is the thing most people miss. The terminal half-life is about a week, so every dose step takes four to five weeks to fully express itself. Judging a step at day ten is judging the ascent, not the plateau, and it is the single commonest reason people escalate before they needed to.

Last edited: Jun 2, 2026 at 1:49 PM
10 5MeganSA_TX, LarryQC_SD, wanda_boise and 7 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
SleepFixSam
Member
212
678
Nov 2024
Hawaii
Jun 2, 2026 at 10:37 AM#5
DebRD_ATL said:
All true, with one condition: that curve is for people who reached the dose on schedule.

That holds for the injectable. The oral formulation has different absorption behaviour and the dose numbers are not interchangeable, which is worth saying out loud because people quote them as if they were.

Last edited: Jun 2, 2026 at 12:37 PM
9 4fiona_VT, denise_HTX, raj_cambridge and 6 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
1235

Similar Threads

Survodutide MASH Phase 2b — histological improvement data9 replies
Semaglutide and MASH — liver fat reduction quantification13 replies
Non-invasive MASH biomarkers — FibroScan, ELF, FIB-4 on GLP-110 replies
ALT normalization rates on GLP-1 — pooled trial data20 replies
GLP-1 hepatoprotection — direct vs indirect mechanisms16 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register