The relationship between early weight loss and weight loss maintenance with naltrexone-bupropion therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Extended-release (ER) naltrexone/bupropion (NB) was associated with greater weight loss than placebo in four randomized, 56-week trials. The association of NB with longer-term maintenance of weight loss remains unknown. Methods: analysis of four phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 56-week studies (COR-I, COR-II, COR-BMOD, and COR-DM), the placebo-controlled cardiovascular outcomes trial LIGHT (208 weeks), and the randomized, open-label trial IGNITE (78 weeks). Included subjects were treated with NB 32 mg/360 mg or placebo, with baseline, week 16, and final time point data. The primary outcome was Kaplan-Meier-estimated weight loss maintenance in each study for up to 204 weeks. Findings: Our analysis included data from 10,198 particpants (NB=5412; placebo=4786). Proportions of patients with ≥5% or ≥10% weight loss maintenance were numerically higher for NB vs. placebo in all studies and time points. Differences were statistically significant for ≥5% weight loss maintenance in COR-BMOD and COR-I/-II at weeks 52 and 56 and the LIGHT study at weeks 52, 104, and 208. For ≥10% weight loss maintenance, differences were statistically significant in COR-I/COR-II at weeks 52 and 56. Interpretation: These data suggest that NB could be used as part of long-term, comprehensive weight loss and weight loss maintenance strategies. Funding: Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc. and Bausch Health Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".