PeptidePedia The community reference

Talk:SUSTAIN trial programme

Discussion page·2 threads·no archives

This article is within the scope of the clinical evidence working group.

This is the discussion page for the article SUSTAIN trial programme. 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.

Retinopathy findingResolved

The attribution to rapid glycaemic improvement is the mainstream reading but it is an attribution, not a demonstration. The article should say so, and it now does. — RetinopathyRex (talk) 10:15, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

"Plausible rather than established" is the correct strength. Neither dismissing the signal nor treating causation as shown. ✓ Done — SafetySignalSid (talk) 13:50, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Resolved. This thread is closed. Reopening it is fine if new sources appear; please add a new subsection rather than editing the closed discussion.

Dose confusion with STEPDone

Readers arrive here from the obesity coverage and assume one dose. Spelling out 0.5 and 1.0 against 2.4 in its own section is worth the space. — SemaglutideSasha (talk) 09:40, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

And it feeds the SURPASS-2 comparator point, which is the same error in another guise. ✓ Done — TrialsTabitha (talk) 13:15, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Done. This thread is closed. Reopening it is fine if new sources appear; please add a new subsection rather than editing the closed discussion.
This page was last edited on 11 May 2026, by TrialsTabitha. Text is available under the PeptidePedia Wiki Content Licence (PPCL-BY-SA 4.0).