Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Evidence synthesis · §3

Counter-ion content and its effect on delivered peptide mass — included and excluded studies

The included-studies table with extracted data, the exclusions with reasons, and the risk-of-bias judgements.

Document identifier
CEI-ES-013/3
Series
Evidence synthesis
Version
2.1
Published
01 Sep 2026
Last reviewed
01 Sep 2026
Next review
01 Mar 2028
Identifier
10.71829/cei.syn.13
Certainty
High
Cycle
2026 Q3
Review type
Analytical evidence review
Search executed
20 Jun 2026

§3Included and excluded studies

Every study contributing to this review is listed below with the data extracted from it. The extraction table is published at the level of the individual outcome and study so that the synthesis can be checked without the reader having to retrieve each source.

§3.1Included studies

Table 4. Included studies with the characteristics extracted from each.

StudyDesignRandomisedDurationAnchor outcome as reportedYear
ACHIEVE-1OrforglipronRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled40 weeksno result held2025
ACHIEVE-2OrforglipronRandomised, double-blind, active-controlled52 weeksno result held2025
ATTAIN-1OrforglipronRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled72 weeksThe Institute holds a headline result indicating a weight effect intermediate between the injectable single agonists and placebo, and awaits the full…2025
ATTAIN-2OrforglipronRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled72 weeksno result held2025
ECNO-PH3-CN-OBESITYEcnoglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled66448 weeksMean change −13.2 % at 2.4 mg versus −0.5 % with placebo2025
ECNO-PH3-CN-T2DEcnoglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled52 weeksno result held2025
ESSENCESemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled1,19772 weeks for part 1Resolution in 62.9 % versus 34.3 % with placebo; difference 28.7 percentage points (95 % CI 21.1 to 36.2)2025
EXENATIDE-GE-PDExenatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled19496 weeksNo significant difference from placebo. The Institute records this as a negative result of a widely publicised earlier phase 2 signal2025
GLORY-1MazdutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled61048 weeksMean change −14.0 % at 6 mg versus +0.3 % with placebo2025
REDEFINE-1CagriSema (cagrilintide with semaglutide)Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled3,41768 weeksMean change −22.7 % versus −2.3 % with placebo2025
REDEFINE-2CagriSema (cagrilintide with semaglutide)Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled1,20668 weeksMean change −15.7 % versus −3.1 % with placebo2025
SOULSemaglutide, oralEvent-driven cardiovascular outcome trial9,650Median 47.5 monthsHazard ratio 0.86 (95 % CI 0.77 to 0.96)2025
STRIDESemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled79252 weeksEstimated treatment ratio 1.13 (95 % CI 1.06 to 1.21)2025
SURMOUNT-5TirzepatideRandomised, open-label, active-controlled75172 weeksMean change −20.2 % with tirzepatide versus −13.7 % with semaglutide2025
SURMOUNT-KOATirzepatideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled68 weeksImprovement relative to placebo. The Institute records that pain improvement in a weight-loss trial cannot be attributed to a direct joint effect2025
SURPASS-CVOTTirzepatideEvent-driven cardiovascular outcome trial13,299Median 4.5 yearsNon-inferior to dulaglutide on the primary composite. The Institute records that an active-controlled non-inferiority design cannot establish superiority over…2025
DREAMS-1MazdutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled31924 weeksA reduction of approximately 1.6 percentage points at 6 mg versus 0.1 with placebo2024
DREAMS-2MazdutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled73148 weeksA dose-dependent glycaemic effect with concurrent weight reduction2024
FLOWSemaglutideEvent-driven kidney outcome trial3,533Median 3.4 yearsHazard ratio 0.76 (95 % CI 0.66 to 0.88); annual eGFR slope difference 1.16 mL/min/1.73 m² per year2024
MARITIDE-PH2-OBESITYMaridebart cafraglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled59252 weeksMean change of approximately −20 % at the highest dose without a weight plateau at 52 weeks2024
MARITIDE-PH2-T2DMaridebart cafraglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled52 weeksA smaller weight effect than in participants without diabetes, consistent with the rest of this class2024
PETRE-PH1BPetrelintidePhase 1 ascending dose16 weeksWeight reduction of approximately 8.6 % at 16 weeks in a phase 1b setting2024
REIMAGINE-1AmycretinPhase 1 ascending dose125Up to 36 weeksExploratory weight reduction of approximately 13 % at 12 weeks with the subcutaneous presentation. The Institute treats an exploratory endpoint in a phase 1…2024
STEP-HFpEF-DMSemaglutideRandomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled61652 weeksDirectionally consistent with STEP-HFpEF with a smaller weight effect, as expected in a population with diabetes2024
24 included studies. Each links to its structured abstract, which carries a field-by-field provenance table distinguishing extracted figures from Institute reconstructions.

Contributing participants across studies reporting a randomised total: 37,696. Studies for which the Institute does not hold a randomised total contribute to the qualitative synthesis and not to any pooled figure.

§3.2Excluded at full text, with reasons

Table 5. Reports excluded at full text, by reason. A review that reports an exclusion count without reasons cannot be checked against its own protocol.

Reason for exclusionReports
Not a randomised comparison9
Population outside the review question8
Intervention outside the review question6
Comparator not eligible7
No eligible outcome reported3
Duplicate report of an included study4
Conference abstract without extractable data11
Retracted or subject to an expression of concern12
45 reports excluded at full text in total.

§3.3Risk of bias across included studies

Table 6. Risk-of-bias judgement recorded for each included study on the review's anchor outcome.

StudyRisk of biasInconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionPublication bias
ACHIEVE-1SomeLowLowLowSome
ACHIEVE-2SomeLowLowSomeLow
ATTAIN-1SomeLowLowLowLow
ATTAIN-2LowLowHighLowLow
ECNO-PH3-CN-OBESITYLowLowSomeSomeLow
ECNO-PH3-CN-T2DSomeLowLowLowSome
ESSENCELowLowSomeLowLow
EXENATIDE-GE-PDLowLowSomeLowLow
GLORY-1SomeLowLowLowLow
REDEFINE-1LowLowLowSomeLow
REDEFINE-2LowLowLowSomeLow
SOULLowLowLowLowSome
STRIDELowLowLowSomeLow
SURMOUNT-5LowLowLowLowLow
Judgements are the Institute's own and are recorded per outcome. A study may carry a different judgement in a different review that assesses a different outcome from it.

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.

  1. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. General Chapter ⟨1225⟩ Validation of Compendial Procedures. United States Pharmacopeia — National Formulary (USP–NF) 2024;USP 2024 Issue 1. 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.

Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.