Study Summaries, Trial Reviews and Mechanism Breakdowns

Retatrutide vs Tirzepatide: What the Trial Data Shows

Retatrutide adds glucagon receptor agonism to the GIP/GLP-1 dual mechanism of tirzepatide. Phase 2 retatrutide data reported larger mean weight reduction at 48 weeks than tirzepatide's phase 3 results, but the two have never been compared head to head, and phase 2 populations are not comparable to phase 3 populations.

Read guide

Tirzepatide vs Semaglutide: The SURMOUNT-5 Head-to-Head

This is the only major incretin comparison supported by direct head-to-head trials. SURPASS-2 compared the two in type 2 diabetes and SURMOUNT-5 in obesity, both reporting greater weight reduction with tirzepatide. Semaglutide, however, has the longer cardiovascular outcome record.

Read guide

Cagrilintide vs Semaglutide: Amylin and Incretin Compared

Cagrilintide is a long-acting amylin analogue; semaglutide is a GLP-1 receptor agonist. They act through different satiety pathways, which is why the interesting research question has been combination rather than substitution — the CagriSema programme tests exactly that.

Read guide

BPC-157 vs TB-500: Two Preclinical Repair Peptides Compared

BPC-157 and TB-500 are the two peptides most often discussed for tissue repair research, and they work through different mechanisms — angiogenic and growth-factor signalling versus actin sequestration and cell migration. Both share the same critical limitation: essentially all supporting evidence is preclinical, from rodent models, with no controlled human trials.

Read guide

MOTS-c vs SS-31: Two Approaches to Mitochondrial Research

MOTS-c and SS-31 both relate to mitochondrial function but sit at very different stages. MOTS-c is an endogenous mitochondrial-derived peptide acting as a metabolic signal; SS-31 (elamipretide) is a synthetic cardiolipin-binding compound that has completed multiple human clinical trials, with mixed primary endpoint results.

Read guide