Talk:Liraglutide
Discussion page·3 threads·no archives
This is the discussion page for the article Liraglutide. It is for improving the article: sources, wording, structure, scope and titles. It is not a general discussion forum about the subject, and it is not a place to ask for advice — see Project:Medical disclaimer.
DPP-4 resistance: the article contradicted itselfResolved
An earlier revision described liraglutide as DPP-4 resistant without qualification. It retains Ala8 and is a DPP-4 substrate; what protects it is albumin binding and self-association, not the sequence. — DPP4_Dagmar (talk) 10:05, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
Corrected, and I have added a sentence saying the point is often misstated, since it will otherwise be reintroduced. — LiraLotte (talk) 13:30, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
Thank you. The contrast with the Aib substitution in semaglutide makes the mechanism clear. ✓ Done — DPP4_Dagmar (talk) 09:12, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
Heptamer self-associationDone
Good to see self-association given its due. It is genuinely underweighted in most summaries relative to albumin binding, and it explains the absorption profile. — StabilityStig (talk) 11:44, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
Agreed. The sentence now says it contributes as much to duration as albumin binding does, which reflects the pharmacokinetic modelling. ✓ Done — MolarMassMaeve (talk) 14:58, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
Should the article say liraglutide is obsolete?Resolved
An edit described the drug as "obsolete". It is still marketed, still used, and holds paediatric indications that newer agents do not. Reverted. — PuffRemoverPax (talk) 09:50, 6 February 2026 (UTC)
"Largely superseded in practice" is accurate and neutral; "obsolete" is a judgement. Current wording is correct. ✓ Done — NeutralNikolai (talk) 12:20, 6 February 2026 (UTC)