PeptideMetabolism
- Primary research area
- Metabolism · obesity
- Regulatory status
- Investigational
- Evidence level
- Human trials
- Primary mechanism
- GIP, GLP-1 and glucagon receptor agonist
Reference profile available · Coverage varies by sectionAlso known as LY3437943
What has been observed?
Selected source-linked reading notes, not the complete literature or a pooled conclusion.
Human · Sponsor reportWhat do the newer phase 3 results add?
80 weeks; 12 mg; efficacy analysis; sponsor topline report. Treatment-regimen estimate: 25.0%.
Lilly reported 28.3% average weight reduction at 80 weeks for 12 mg using the efficacy analysis; the treatment-regimen analysis reported 25.0%.
Limits: Sponsor-reported topline results. Different analysis assumptions produce different estimates; this was not a direct tirzepatide comparison.
Open primary source · Read interpretation separatelyHuman · Reading scope not recordedHow strong is the weight-loss signal for retatrutide?
48 weeks; highest-dose group, 12 mg; randomized phase 2 trial, 338 adults.
The highest-dose group lost an average of 24.2% of body weight at 48 weeks, versus 2.1% with placebo.
Limits: This is a separate trial from SURMOUNT-5. Its percentages cannot establish superiority to tirzepatide or semaglutide. Gastrointestinal events and heart-rate increases were reported.
Open primary source · Read interpretation separatelyExplore outcomes for this compound- Uses & research
The cited phase 1b trial investigated safety, glucose control and weight in people with type 2 diabetes; a phase 2 trial studied adults with obesity. [1][2]
- Known half-life
Approximately 6 days in the phase 1b study after administration under the skin. [1]
Half-life describes how quickly the measured drug concentration falls by half. It does not set a dosing interval.- Evidence & important limits
These are investigational trial results, not a treatment recommendation. Gastrointestinal adverse effects were common in the trials. Comparisons across different trials cannot establish a universal best compound. [1][2]
Safety & evidence boundaries
Source-specific information, not a personal safety clearance or monitoring plan.
These are investigational trial results, not a treatment recommendation. Gastrointestinal adverse effects were common in the trials. Comparisons across different trials cannot establish a universal best compound.
Explore safety questions by system
These are literature filters, not claims that this compound causes each effect. A keyword match is not a confirmed adverse reaction.
Interactions, rare harms, long-term effects and reversibility require separate evidence. Do not infer they are absent when the sources here do not address them.
Identity, names & formulations
Canonical compound: Retatrutide · retatrutide
Searchable names: LY3437943
Names share a parent research page. Different esters, salts, routes and brands are not assumed to have the same half-life, indication or exposure.
Combination evidence stays attached to the studied combination. It is not automatically assigned to each ingredient.
Understand the evidence types
Read the model and design first, then the population, outcome and limitations. These categories describe evidence, not a best-compound ranking.
- Randomized human trials
- Compare assigned interventions. Randomization does not by itself establish low bias or relevance to every population.
- Controlled human studies
- Use a comparison group; allocation and confounding still matter.
- Prospective human research
- Follows participants forward. It may be observational or interventional, so this is not a separate quality grade.
- Observational human research
- Describes associations. Confounding can explain differences.
- Case reports and series
- Useful for unusual events and safety signals, not reliable rates or effect sizes.
- Animal research
- Can test biology and function in a living model. Human exposure, benefit and safety remain separate questions.
- Cell and tissue research
- Tests responses in a preparation, including human-derived cells. It is not a human participant trial.
- Mechanistic and computational evidence
- Helps explain or predict a pathway; predictions need experimental and clinical testing.
- Anecdotal reports
- Self-reported experiences can generate questions. Product identity, selection bias and other interventions may be uncontrolled.
Systematic reviews synthesize studies and depend on their quality. Preprint status and abstract versus full-paper reading are separate labels. Citation popularity measures attention, not reliability. A study summary is not a formal quality appraisal.