PeptidePedia The community reference

SELECT trial: difference between revisions

Diff·revision 16 → 17·05:01, 23 May 2025

Difference between revision 16 and revision 17 of SELECT trial. 6 lines changed; the page grew by 645 bytes.

Revision 16 — 17:50, 29 Apr 2025
SemaglutideSasha (talk)
ce per PP:MOS
4,206 bytes ±0
Revision 17 — 05:01, 23 May 2025
SelectTrialSam (talk)
name the funder in the sentence, per PP:MOS
4,851 bytes +645
33The [[Number needed to treat|number needed to treat]] can be computed from the absolute risk difference of 1.5 percentage points over roughly 3.3 years, giving approximately 67 over that period. Absolute rather than relative figures are what allow benefit and harm to be compared on the same scale.{{r|nnt_ref}}33The [[Number needed to treat|number needed to treat]] can be computed from the absolute risk difference of 1.5 percentage points over roughly 3.3 years, giving approximately 67 over that period. Absolute rather than relative figures are what allow benefit and harm to be compared on the same scale.{{r|nnt_ref}}
3434
+35== What it changed ==
+36SELECT supported a cardiovascular risk-reduction indication for semaglutide 2.4 mg in the studied population, distinct from the weight-management indication, and it did so in a population without diabetes.{{r|lincoff2023}}
+37
+38It does not establish benefit in primary prevention, in people without overweight or obesity, or for other members of the [[GLP-1 receptor agonist|class]]. Within the class, the outcome trials have not all been positive — the exenatide trial was neutral and the lixisenatide trial was neutral — so a class claim is not supported. See [[Exenatide]].{{r|marso2016s}}
+39
35== References ==40== References ==
36{{reflist}}41{{reflist}}
46* [[FLOW trial]]51* [[FLOW trial]]
47* [[Number needed to treat]]52* [[Number needed to treat]]
+53* [[GLP-1 receptor agonist]]
4854
49{{DEFAULTSORT:SELECT trial}}55{{DEFAULTSORT:SELECT trial}}