Semaglutide versus liraglutide head to head: reading STEP 8 carefully posts 61–82
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
The C-cell question: semaglutide triggered medullary thyroid carcinoma in rodent toxicology studies. A signal in rodents does not automatically appear in humans, but it is the reason the compound is contraindicated in people with personal or family history of medullary thyroid carcinoma or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2.
Is there a ceiling dose beyond which the effect plateaus? The trials did not study that because they stopped at 2.4 mg. Some people report trying higher doses, but trial data is absent and off-label dosing enters territory this site does not advise on.
I read post #62 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
The 165 to 184 hour range: that is roughly 7 to 7.6 days, which is why the weekly schedule works. Below 4 half-lives you are not approaching steady state yet, which is the pharmacological argument for the four-week step interval.
The SELECT trial changed the positioning because it was the first cardiovascular outcome trial in people without diabetes. That decoupled the cardiovascular argument from glycaemic control, which is why it mattered beyond its own numbers.
Two things before anyone answers the substance.
First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.
Picking up post #64: that is the part I would want checked first.
The opalescent appearance in semaglutide solutions is occasionally noted and the mechanism is unclear. It does not appear to correlate with product failure in practice. Visible particles or frank cloudiness is different and would be reason to contact the supplier.
Coming back to post #66, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
On alcohol: the labelling does not contraindicate it, but it raises gastric irritation risk and semaglutide already does that. There is no published interaction study and the conservative position is to limit it if you are titrating or if gastrointestinal symptoms are troublesome.
Semaglutide versus liraglutide in STEP 8: semaglutide produced greater weight reduction and the discontinuation rates differed. But the trial was open-label for the dosing schedule, which admits expectation effects. Weekly versus daily itself is part of the comparison, not a confounding variable to be removed.
Approved indications differ by jurisdiction and change. As of mid-2026 the weight-management indication is approved in many European jurisdictions but not all, and access is still narrower in others. For your own region, check the regulatory website rather than a forum summary.
Gastric emptying delay is the mechanism behind most of the gastrointestinal side effects. Slowing the stomach empties it feeds less food into the intestines at a time, which is part of the satiety mechanism but is also why nausea is dose-dependent and titration-dependent.
On post #69 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
The mass figure differs between sources because of how the different entities report it. The monoisotopic mass of the bare peptide is one number; the mass including the acylation is another. Different sources emphasise different details.
post #73 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Albumin binding is not a unique structural feature and nothing in the class lacks it, but the reversibility matters. Semaglutide binds albumin covalently through a fatty side chain, which creates a very long half-life at the cost of sequestering the free form. That is a trade-off and it is the trade-off that allows weekly dosing.
The STEP programme populations were selected: enrollment criteria required baseline body mass index over 30, no recent blood pressure crisis, no recent retinopathy, no renal disease at the time. Applying results from that population to someone well outside it is an extrapolation and should be called one.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Is there a ceiling dose beyond which the effect plateaus? The trials did not study that because they stopped at 2.4 mg. Some people report trying higher doses, but trial data is absent and off-label dosing enters territory this site does not advise on.
Worth separating two things that post #73 runs together.
The C-cell question: semaglutide triggered medullary thyroid carcinoma in rodent toxicology studies. A signal in rodents does not automatically appear in humans, but it is the reason the compound is contraindicated in people with personal or family history of medullary thyroid carcinoma or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2.
post #77 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
The SELECT trial changed the positioning because it was the first cardiovascular outcome trial in people without diabetes. That decoupled the cardiovascular argument from glycaemic control, which is why it mattered beyond its own numbers.
Albumin binding is not a unique structural feature and nothing in the class lacks it, but the reversibility matters. Semaglutide binds albumin covalently through a fatty side chain, which creates a very long half-life at the cost of sequestering the free form. That is a trade-off and it is the trade-off that allows weekly dosing.
The mass figure differs between sources because of how the different entities report it. The monoisotopic mass of the bare peptide is one number; the mass including the acylation is another. Different sources emphasise different details.
I read post #80 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
The STEP programme populations were selected: enrollment criteria required baseline body mass index over 30, no recent blood pressure crisis, no recent retinopathy, no renal disease at the time. Applying results from that population to someone well outside it is an extrapolation and should be called one.
This topic was referenced in
- Comparing the STEP programme populations: who was actually enrolled — the long versionCompounds › Semaglutide · 4 replies
- The C-cell question: rodent findings and their human context — what changed sinceCompounds › Semaglutide · 65 replies
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Molecular mass of semaglutide and why the figure differs between sources
Molecular mass of semaglutide and why the figure differs between sources — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing SURMOUNT-2 ( Lancet , 2023) with STEP 4 ( JAMA , 2021)…
|
+101 | 110 | 12k | 16h |
|
Tracking semaglutide's approved indications across jurisdictions, dated — does this still hold?
Tracking semaglutide's approved indications across jurisdictions, dated — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Comparing SCALE ( N…
|
+58 | 62 | 49k | 20mo |
|
Why semaglutide solutions can look faintly opalescent and when that matters
The question in the title: Why semaglutide solutions can look faintly opalescent and when that matters I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Comparing LEADER ( N Engl J Med ,…
|
+73 | 79 | 2k | 4mo |
|
Coming back to: What the published dose-response for semaglutide actually looks like above 2.4 mg
The question in the title: What the published dose-response for semaglutide actually looks like above 2.4 mg I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. I have seen LEADER ( N Engl J…
|
+23 | 27 | 9.9k | 1mo |
|
Semaglutide and gastric emptying — the mechanism behind most of the side-effect profile — what changed since
Semaglutide and gastric emptying — the mechanism behind most of the side-effect profile — what changed since — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Comparing STEP 4 ( JAMA ,…
|
+6 | 10 | 6.1k | 8mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags STEP programme, SELECT trial, randomised trial
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Journal club: SURMOUNT-OSA and a hard endpoint in a soft field
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Journal club: SURMOUNT-OSA and a hard endpoint in a soft field Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing SURMOUNT-4 ( JAMA , 2024) with SCALE ( N Engl J…
|
+47 | 51 | 617 | 16mo |
|
Tirzepatide in obstructive sleep apnoea: reading SURMOUNT-OSA
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Tirzepatide in obstructive sleep apnoea: reading SURMOUNT-OSA Everything below is what sits behind that. I have seen SCALE ( N Engl J Med , 2015) cited in support…
|
+4 | 8 | 14k | 8mo |
|
Journal club: STEP 3 and the intensive behavioural therapy floor
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Journal club: STEP 3 and the intensive behavioural therapy floor Everything below is what sits behind that. Comparing SCALE ( N Engl J Med , 2015) with STEP 4 (…
|
+6 | 10 | 13k | 28d |
|
Getting a referral rather than a refusal
Getting a referral rather than a refusal — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. General question, not a request for advice about my own care — I know the difference and I would…
|
+8 | 12 | 32k | 2mo |
|
Second pass at: Cagrilintide's dosing interval and the pharmacokinetics behind it
On the subject in the title: Second pass at: Cagrilintide's dosing interval and the pharmacokinetics behind it Working notes rather than a conclusion. Session topic: SURMOUNT-1 ( N Engl J Med , 2022). Please…
|
+2 | 6 | 2.4k | 7mo |