Public comment period · §3
Draft monograph: tirzepatide, version 2 — disposition
The disposition of every submission and the amendments that resulted.
§3Disposition and amendments
§3.1Disposition table
Table 1. Every submission with its disposition. Each row links to the submission in full.
| Reference | Respondent | Point raised | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/005 | Dr Ludmila Tollemache | Registered trials that never reported are absent from the monograph | Accepted |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/012 | Dr Frideswide Hazelrigg | What happens when the compound is stopped is not addressed | Accepted |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/008 | Dr Liesbeth Quenneville | Declared interests should appear on the document rather than on a separate page | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/011 | Hortensia Hollingworth | The monograph should not describe how the compound is supplied outside a regulated route | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/006 | Dr Jolyon Grünbaum-Sowande | The document is unreadable without specialist training | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/003 | Dr Jolanta Uttridge | Doses are expressed in units that differ between sections | Accepted |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/004 | Dr Georgiana Mountstephen | The compound is supplied under names the monograph does not list | Accepted |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/010 | Dr Hyacinth Oyelaran-Steen | Where the compound is a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, the cardiovascular outcome evidence should… | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/015 | Dr Zofia Petrossian | The absence of a rare harm in the trial set is presented as reassurance | Accepted |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/009 | Dr Amara Vandergraaf | The population to which the headline estimate applies is not stated with the estimate | Accepted |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/002 | Rosalind Petrossian | The analytical section is longer than the clinical assessment it accompanies | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/001 | Dr Rukayat Zaleski-Mbeki | A superseded version should remain reachable from the version that replaced it | Noted, no amendment |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/014 | Dr Thaddeus Isaksen-Balogun industry | Two factual descriptions of the sponsor's programme are inaccurate | Accepted |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/007 | Dr Dmitri Nordhagen | References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source | Accepted in part |
| DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/013 | Dr Melisande Kirkpatrick-Ola | The monograph should state what the compound costs | Not accepted |
| 15 submissions in total. | |||
§3.2Summary by disposition
Table 2. Counts by disposition, with the meaning of each.
| Disposition | Count | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted | 7 | The submission is accepted and the draft is amended as proposed. The amendment is recorded in the amendment log of the document it changed and is traceable to the numbered submission. |
| Accepted in part | 4 | Part of the submission is accepted and part is not. The secretariat response states which part is which and on what ground the remainder was declined. |
| Noted, no amendment | 3 | The submission raises a point the Institute accepts but that does not require a change to the draft, most often because the draft already states it elsewhere. The location is given in the response. |
| Not accepted | 1 | The submission is not accepted. The secretariat response gives the reason. A submission that is not accepted remains published in full; the Institute does not remove a submission because it disagrees with it. |
§3.3Resulting amendments
- Registered trials that never reported are absent from the monograph — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/005. The trial list now includes every registered trial the Institute identified, with its reporting status stated, and the monograph reports the proportion of registered trials for which no result has been posted or published.
- What happens when the compound is stopped is not addressed — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/012. Discontinuation trajectory is now an assessed outcome in every monograph where a contributing trial measured it, and a recorded evidence gap in every monograph where none did, so that its absence is visible rather than silent.
- The document is unreadable without specialist training — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/006. Every document now opens with a plain-language summary of not more than 150 words, placed above the technical abstract and carrying the same certainty language, so that the two cannot diverge.
- Doses are expressed in units that differ between sections — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/003. A single dose unit is now used throughout each monograph, with the source unit retained in parentheses wherever a conversion was applied, and every conversion is stated rather than performed silently.
- The compound is supplied under names the monograph does not list — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/004. The synonym list is extended to include every name the Institute can evidence from a document it holds, each recorded with its source. Names asserted without a supporting document are not added, and the distinction is stated at the head of the list.
- Where the compound is a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, the cardiovascular outcome… — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/010. Cardiovascular outcomes are now an assessed outcome with their own certainty rating in every monograph for which a dedicated cardiovascular outcome trial of that compound has reported, and are recorded as not assessed elsewhere.
- The absence of a rare harm in the trial set is presented as reassurance — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/015. Wherever the monograph reports that an event was not observed, it now states the total exposure and the frequency the contributing trials could have detected, so that the absence is read as the limit of the evidence rather than as a finding.
- The population to which the headline estimate applies is not stated with the estimate — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/009. Every headline estimate now carries a one-line statement of the population in which it was observed, and the full eligibility criteria are reported in the included-studies table rather than only in the source.
- The analytical section is longer than the clinical assessment it accompanies — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/002. The analytical section is reduced to compound-specific content and cross-references the relevant standards for the general procedure, which shortens it substantially without removing what is not available elsewhere.
- Two factual descriptions of the sponsor's programme are inaccurate — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/014. The trial status now reads as completed at a pre-specified interim analysis, with the analysis identified, and the dose is stated in the unit used in the approved labelling. The submission is identified as an industry submission on its face in accordance with…
- References should carry a persistent identifier for every cited source — arising from DRAFT-TIRZEPATIDE-/007. Every reference without a persistent identifier now carries an explicit statement that the identifier is not held by the Institute, so that its absence is a recorded fact rather than an apparent oversight.
References cited on this page
References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.
- International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute
Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.
Compound Evidence Institute · CEI-CP-006/3 · https://compoundevidence.com/comment-periods/draft-tirzepatide-monograph-v2/disposition/ · retrieved 30 July 2026