Retatrutide vs CagriSema: Next-Generation Obesity Drugs Compared

Overview

Retatrutide and CagriSema are two of the most closely watched next-generation obesity drugs. Both aim for weight loss above 20%, but they get there in very different ways. Retatrutide (LY3437943, Eli Lilly) is a single molecule that activates three receptors: GIP, GLP-1 and glucagon. CagriSema (Novo Nordisk) is a fixed-ratio mix of two separate molecules, cagrilintide (a long-acting amylin analogue) and semaglutide (a GLP-1 receptor agonist), given together as one weekly injection.

They are the lead experimental obesity drugs from the two companies that dominate the metabolic drug market, and how they perform will shape obesity treatment for years.

Both programs now have pivotal Phase 3 results, which makes the comparison much clearer. Retatrutide has two positive Phase 3 obesity readouts: TRIUMPH-4 (-28.7% at 68 weeks in obesity + knee OA, December 2025) and TRIUMPH-1 (-28.3% at 80 weeks in obesity without diabetes, n=2,339, May 21, 2026). CagriSema has reported its full REDEFINE program: REDEFINE-1 (-22.7% at 68 weeks, published in NEJM), REDEFINE-2 (-15.7% at 68 weeks in T2D) and, most important, REDEFINE-4 head-to-head versus tirzepatide 15 mg: CagriSema 23.0% vs tirzepatide 25.5% (efficacy estimand), where CagriSema FAILED the noninferiority test. Novo Nordisk filed an NDA with the FDA in December 2025 based on REDEFINE-1 and REDEFINE-2.

Important note: No clinical trial has compared retatrutide with CagriSema directly. Both are investigational drugs in Phase 3 development, and comparing them means relying on data with real limits. Comparisons across trials with different designs, durations and populations are especially hard to interpret.

Mechanism of Action

CagriSema (Cagrilintide + Semaglutide)

CagriSema puts two different peptide hormones into one weekly injection:

Cagrilintide is a long-acting version of amylin, a 37-amino-acid hormone released alongside insulin by the pancreatic beta cells. Activating the amylin receptor produces:

• Appetite suppression through brain pathways (the area postrema and nucleus of the solitary tract) that complement, but work separately from, GLP-1 receptor pathways
• Slower gastric emptying via signals carried by the vagus nerve
• Less glucagon release after meals
• Possible effects on reward-driven eating

Semaglutide (the same molecule as in Wegovy/Ozempic) suppresses appetite, boosts insulin secretion, lowers glucagon and slows gastric emptying through the GLP-1 receptor.

The idea behind CagriSema is that amylin and GLP-1 switch on separate appetite-suppressing pathways in the brain. Together they curb appetite more than either does alone, so calorie intake falls by an additive or even synergistic amount.

Retatrutide

Retatrutide takes a different multi-receptor route, as a single synthetic peptide (39 amino acids, molecular weight ~4,731 Da):

• GLP-1 receptor activation suppresses appetite and boosts glucose-dependent insulin secretion (the same pathway as CagriSema’s semaglutide)
• GIP receptor activation remodels fat tissue, boosts insulin secretion and may act on appetite centers in the brain
• Glucagon receptor activation raises energy use in the liver, fat burning and heat production

The Fundamental Strategic Difference

The core difference is this. CagriSema pushes appetite suppression as far as it can through two appetite pathways (amylin + GLP-1). Retatrutide combines appetite suppression (GLP-1 + GIP) with higher energy use (glucagon). CagriSema works on calories in from two directions; retatrutide works on both calories in and calories out.

That matters. Energy balance has two sides. CagriSema pushes hard on intake through two independent appetite pathways. Retatrutide pushes on both sides: somewhat stronger appetite suppression (three receptors vs. two) and a substantial rise in energy use (via GCGR-driven heat production). The clinical effects of this difference show up most clearly in the weight loss plateau and in liver fat.

Efficacy Comparison

Weight Loss

Trial	Drug / Dose	Population	Duration	Mean weight loss (efficacy estimand)
TRIUMPH-1	Retatrutide 12 mg	Obesity, no T2D	80 wk	-28.3%
TRIUMPH-4	Retatrutide 12 mg	Obesity + knee OA	68 wk	-28.7%
REDEFINE-1 (NEJM)	CagriSema 2.4/2.4 mg	Obesity, no T2D	68 wk	-22.7%
REDEFINE-2	CagriSema 2.4/2.4 mg	Obesity + T2D	68 wk	-15.7%
REDEFINE-4 (vs tirz)	CagriSema 2.4/2.4 mg	Obesity	84 wk	-23.0% (vs tirzepatide -25.5%)

In the most comparable group, people with obesity but no diabetes, retatrutide produces about 5-6 percentage points more weight loss than CagriSema (TRIUMPH-1 vs REDEFINE-1: -28.3% vs -22.7%). In people with obesity and T2D, TRIUMPH-2 reported -20.8% at 12 mg over 80 weeks, against CagriSema’s -15.7% at 68 weeks in REDEFINE-2.

REDEFINE-4: The Tirzepatide Benchmark

REDEFINE-4 was Novo Nordisk’s high-stakes head-to-head trial against Eli Lilly’s tirzepatide 15 mg (n=809 adults with obesity). CagriSema lost: 23.0% vs 25.5% (efficacy estimand), 20.2% vs 23.6% (treatment-regimen estimand). It did not meet the noninferiority threshold. The trial settled a question that had hung over CagriSema’s commercial prospects. The answer: CagriSema is less effective than a drug already approved by the FDA and on the market. In cross-trial terms, that puts retatrutide (-28.3% in TRIUMPH-1) about 3-5 percentage points above tirzepatide and about 5-6 percentage points above CagriSema.

Approach to Weight Loss Plateau

The plateau is where the two approaches may differ most in theory. With most obesity drugs, weight loss slows and levels off as the body pushes back (metabolic adaptation, hormonal changes):

• CagriSema tackles the plateau mainly through stronger appetite suppression. If metabolic adaptation lowers energy use, the body eventually settles at a new balance even with appetite still suppressed. Two appetite pathways may push that balance point further than one, but the approach is still limited by the body’s ability to slow its metabolism.
• Retatrutide may hold an edge at the plateau, because glucagon-driven energy use works directly against metabolic adaptation. By raising energy use while cutting intake, it may keep weight loss going longer. Phase 2 data showing a curve that had not flattened at 48 weeks fit this idea, and the Phase 3 TRIUMPH-4 result (-28.7%, above Phase 2) supports it further.

The difference may grow with longer treatment. If CagriSema’s weight loss levels off while retatrutide’s continues, the gap could widen over time.

Liver Fat Reduction

This is probably where the difference in mechanism matters most:

Parameter	CagriSema	Retatrutide
Expected liver fat reduction	Moderate to substantial (via weight loss)	~82% relative reduction (Phase 2)
Primary mechanism	Indirect: weight loss and metabolic improvement	Direct: GCGR-mediated hepatic fatty acid oxidation + indirect
Relevance to MASLD	Beneficial but weight-loss-dependent	Potentially disease-modifying

CagriSema should reduce liver fat mainly through weight loss and the metabolic gains that come with it. That is similar to what semaglutide does alone, possibly to a greater degree given the larger weight loss. But the effect is still indirect.

Retatrutide’s glucagon component drives fat burning in the liver directly, in effect telling liver cells to burn their stored fat in the mitochondria (beta-oxidation). The result is about an 82% relative drop in liver fat, likely more than any approach built on appetite suppression can reach, however much weight is lost.

For the many people who have both obesity and MASLD/MASH, this difference could decide which drug is used.

Glycemic Control

Both drugs should lower blood sugar strongly, thanks to their GLP-1 receptor activity. In Phase 2 in type 2 diabetes, retatrutide cut HbA1c by up to -2.02%, with weight loss of -16.9%. CagriSema’s blood sugar data are still coming in through its Phase 3 program.

In theory, retatrutide’s glucagon component could raise blood sugar. Phase 2 showed that GIP- and GLP-1-driven insulin release more than cancels this out, so blood sugar improves overall. CagriSema’s amylin component helps control blood sugar after meals by lowering glucagon and slowing gastric emptying.

Safety Comparison

Gastrointestinal Effects

Both drugs cause GI side effects, because both act on stomach emptying and on appetite circuits in the brain:

Adverse Event	CagriSema (REDEFINE 1, 68 weeks)	Retatrutide 12 mg (TRIUMPH-4, 68 weeks)
Nausea	55% (placebo 12.6%)	43.2% (placebo 10.7%)
Vomiting	26.1% (placebo 4.1%)	20.9% (placebo 0%)
Constipation	30.7% (placebo 11.6%)	25.0% (placebo 8.7%)
Discontinuation due to AEs	6% (placebo 3.7%)	18.2% (placebo 4.0%)

In REDEFINE 1, published in NEJM, 79.6% of people on CagriSema and 39.9% on placebo had a gastrointestinal adverse event of some kind. The per-event CagriSema figures above come from trade reports of the trial; those summaries did not report diarrhea.

CagriSema’s nausea may be driven by both amylin and GLP-1 receptor activation, each of which causes nausea by its own route. Two nausea pathways could in theory mean more GI events than either alone, though the co-formulation and the dose-escalation schedule are designed to limit this.

In Phase 3 TRIUMPH-4, retatrutide 12 mg caused nausea in 43.2%, diarrhea in 33.1%, vomiting in 20.9% and constipation in 25.0% over 68 weeks. Nausea and vomiting were less common than with CagriSema in REDEFINE 1, but more people stopped retatrutide because of side effects. These are cross-trial comparisons.

GI tolerability is more than a comfort issue. It affects whether people stay on treatment, and that decides how well a drug works in real life. A drug that produces 28% weight loss in trials but drives many people to quit may deliver less real-world weight loss than a better-tolerated drug with 22% trial efficacy.

Gallbladder and Pancreatitis

Any drug that causes large weight loss raises the risk of gallstones. Cholesterol released as fat is broken down rapidly increases that risk, whatever the drug’s mechanism. Pancreatitis is a general concern with incretin-based drugs, though rates are low (<1%). Phase 3 data from both programs will pin these risks down more precisely.

Dysesthesia

The Phase 3 TRIUMPH-4 data also found a new safety signal for retatrutide: dysesthesia (tingling, numbness or burning sensations), reported in 20.9% of the 12 mg group versus 0.7% on placebo. It was not prominent in Phase 2 and is thought to be linked to glucagon receptor activity. CagriSema does not act on the glucagon receptor, so it would not be expected to carry this risk.

Unique Safety Considerations

CagriSema-specific: Amylin analogues raise theoretical concerns about cross-reactivity with the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway and possible effects on bone. Long-term safety data for high-dose amylin analogues in obesity are limited. Pramlintide, an older and shorter-acting amylin analogue, was approved for diabetes but never caught on, partly because of practical drawbacks and tolerability problems. Cagrilintide is designed to get around many of those drawbacks, but its long-term safety in people with obesity still needs watching.

Retatrutide-specific: Glucagon receptor activation raises theoretical concerns about glucose output from the liver (which could work against blood sugar control), effects on lean mass and long-term effects on the liver. Phase 2 data were reassuring on blood sugar: GIP and GLP-1 receptor activation fully offset glucagon’s glucose-raising effect. Despite the good liver fat data, longer-term liver monitoring is needed. The effects of years of GCGR stimulation on amino acid metabolism and lean body mass also need watching.

Cardiovascular Profiles

Neither drug has dedicated cardiovascular outcomes trial data. Both should improve cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure, lipids, inflammatory markers) through weight loss and direct metabolic effects.

CagriSema has one possible advantage: its semaglutide component has proven cardiovascular benefit from the SELECT trial. Whether that benefit carries over to the combination with cagrilintide needs to be tested separately, since adding a second drug could in theory change the cardiovascular profile.

In Phase 2, retatrutide improved cardiovascular risk factors, but there are no dedicated outcomes data. Both drugs will eventually need cardiovascular outcomes data for a full safety picture.

Body Composition and Lean Mass Preservation

At the level of weight loss both drugs aim for (20%+), body composition becomes a key secondary outcome. Weight loss is worth less if too much lean mass (muscle, bone) goes with the fat.

CagriSema

CagriSema’s weight loss comes mainly from appetite suppression, creating a calorie deficit much like dieting. Body composition data from the REDEFINE program will matter, but the expectation is a lean-to-fat ratio similar to semaglutide alone (about 30-40% lean mass). Amylin may affect how nutrients are partitioned, but that is speculative.

Retatrutide

Retatrutide adds a complication. Glucagon receptor activation boosts fat burning (which may shift energy use toward fat and away from protein) and also amino acid breakdown (which may increase protein loss). The net effect at -28.7% weight loss is an important open question. Phase 2 was not powered to detect body composition differences with confidence.

Because retatrutide removes so much weight, even the same proportion of lean mass loss means more muscle lost in absolute terms. A 110 kg patient losing 31.6 kg could lose 10-12 kg of lean mass, enough to affect physical function, especially in older adults.

Practical Implications

For both drugs, clinical practice should include:

• Adequate protein intake (≥1.2-1.6 g/kg/day of ideal body weight) throughout treatment
• Resistance exercise at least 2-3 times weekly
• Regular monitoring of functional capacity, grip strength, and physical performance
• Bone density screening in at-risk patients

Dose Escalation and Treatment Initiation

CagriSema

CagriSema’s dose escalation has to manage two active molecules. The schedule must balance the GI tolerability of both semaglutide and cagrilintide. Because both cause nausea through separate pathways (GLP-1R and amylin receptors), the escalation plan is a critical part of the design. Novo Nordisk tuned it in the REDEFINE program to limit early dropouts while reaching effective doses in a reasonable time.

Retatrutide

Retatrutide’s single-molecule design makes dose escalation simpler: one molecule, one dose curve. The TRIUMPH-4 titration schedule appears well tuned and may have helped the results improve on Phase 2. The target maintenance dose is 12 mg once weekly by subcutaneous injection.

Where Each Drug Fits in the Market

The retatrutide-CagriSema rivalry mirrors the wider contest between Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, the two companies that dominate the metabolic drug market. Each drug reflects its maker’s strategy:

Novo Nordisk (CagriSema): Builds on its semaglutide franchise by adding an amylin component. This is step-by-step innovation: take a proven backbone and improve it. The advantages are familiarity (doctors already know semaglutide) and the SELECT cardiovascular data behind the semaglutide component.

Eli Lilly (Retatrutide): Takes a new single-molecule route that departs more sharply from existing drugs. This is platform innovation: a new class of molecule (triple agonist) with a different mechanism. The advantages are potentially greater efficacy and a distinct clinical profile, especially for liver fat.

Both strategies make sense, and the market is probably big enough for both drugs. More than 650 million adults worldwide have obesity, and well under 5% receive drug treatment. Even if both drugs are approved, need will far outstrip supply for years.

Molecular and Practical Differences

Feature	CagriSema	Retatrutide
Molecular type	Two-molecule combination	Single peptide
Receptor targets	Amylin + GLP-1	GIP + GLP-1 + Glucagon
Molecular weight	Two separate molecules co-formulated	~4,731 Da (single molecule)
Manufacturer	Novo Nordisk	Eli Lilly
Primary weight loss mechanism	Dual appetite suppression	Appetite suppression + energy expenditure
Liver fat approach	Indirect (via weight loss)	Direct (glucagon-mediated oxidation)
Administration	Once-weekly SC injection	Once-weekly SC injection
Development phase	Under FDA review (filed December 2025)	Phase 3 (TRIUMPH program)
Phase 3 weight loss	-22.7% at 68 weeks (REDEFINE-1)	-28.7% at 68 weeks
Competitive context	Built on proven semaglutide backbone	Novel single-molecule approach

Manufacturing Considerations

As a single molecule, retatrutide may be easier to manufacture than CagriSema’s two-molecule combination. A co-formulated product has to keep two separate peptides stable, potent and consistent in one injection, which is harder. Retatrutide’s single-peptide design simplifies manufacturing, storage and quality control. That sounds like a small technical point, but it affects how fast production can scale, the cost of goods and supply reliability. All of these proved critical during the GLP-1 agonist shortages of 2023-2024.

Status and Availability

Parameter	CagriSema	Retatrutide
Development phase	NDA under FDA review	Pivotal Phase 3 complete; application planned by Q1 2027
Regulatory submission	FDA NDA filed December 2025	No later than Q1 2027 (planned; FDA says NDA, Lilly contesting)
Earliest approval	FDA decision expected by late 2026 (Novo, February 2026)	Late 2027 - mid-2028
Manufacturer	Novo Nordisk	Eli Lilly
Phase 3 obesity weight loss	-22.7% (REDEFINE-1)	-28.3% (TRIUMPH-1) / -28.7% (TRIUMPH-4)
Phase 3 head-to-head	Lost vs tirzepatide (REDEFINE-4)	TRANSCEND-T2D-2 vs semaglutide 2 mg (topline October 2026); TRIUMPH-5 vs tirzepatide still running
Available for prescription	No	No
Clinical trial access	REDEFINE trials	TRIUMPH/TRANSCEND trials

Novo Nordisk filed an NDA with the FDA for CagriSema in December 2025, based on REDEFINE-1 and REDEFINE-2. In February 2026 Novo said it expected an FDA decision by late 2026. Lilly plans to file retatrutide’s application no later than Q1 2027, so its earliest decision is late 2027. On October 2, 2026 the FDA ruled that retatrutide is a drug, so that application must be an NDA; Lilly is contesting the FDA ruling in court. CagriSema is therefore closer to market, but retatrutide has the stronger Phase 3 efficacy. Neither should be bought from unregulated sources.

Clinical Implications

Retatrutide and CagriSema are the two leading next-generation obesity drugs, and their Phase 3 programs will likely shape the field for the next decade. Both aim for 20%+ average weight loss, which approaches what surgery achieves.

Once both are available, the choice may come down to the clinical situation:

• Patients with significant fatty liver (MASLD/MASH) may do better on retatrutide, with its direct glucagon-driven liver fat clearance. An approach built only on appetite suppression is unlikely to match its ~82% liver fat reduction.
• Patients whose appetite was not curbed enough on GLP-1 drugs alone might respond to CagriSema’s separate amylin pathway, which acts on different brain regions than GLP-1.
• Patients who need the most total weight loss may favor retatrutide, based on TRIUMPH-4 (-28.7% vs. -22.7% in REDEFINE-1).
• Patients with cardiovascular risk may lean toward CagriSema if the semaglutide component’s heart benefit is confirmed for the combination.
• Retatrutide’s single-molecule design could make it easier to manufacture and formulate than CagriSema’s two-molecule mix, which may affect cost and supply.

The Broader Significance

These two drugs mark a turning point in obesity treatment. Obesity drugs used to deliver 5-10% weight loss; now they are reaching 20-30%, a range that overlaps many bariatric surgery results. That changes the math for patients and health systems alike. Drug treatment becomes a credible alternative to surgery for many people, opening effective treatment to far more than the relatively few who have an operation.

Long-Term Considerations

Weight Regain After Discontinuation

A key question for both drugs is what happens when treatment stops. Semaglutide studies (STEP 1 extension, STEP 4) show significant regain after GLP-1 agonists are stopped, with about two-thirds of lost weight back within one year. CagriSema contains semaglutide and is expected to behave similarly, though the amylin component could in theory change the regain pattern.

Nobody knows yet what happens when retatrutide is stopped. The glucagon component could in theory cause metabolic changes that partly persist after the drug is withdrawn, but this is speculation. Assume both drugs must be taken long term to keep the benefit.

Cost and Access

Neither drug has a price yet, but cost will be critical to uptake:

• CagriSema’s two-molecule makeup may cost more to manufacture than retatrutide’s single peptide
• Both drugs will compete for insurance coverage at a time when payer resistance to obesity drugs is easing but still significant
• Retatrutide’s greater efficacy could make it more cost-effective if it cuts related diseases and healthcare use by a proportionally larger amount
• Global access will depend on how well manufacturing scales; the GLP-1 agonist shortages of 2023-2024 showed how demand can outrun production

Regulatory Pathway

Both drugs are seeking approval by similar routes, which require clinically meaningful weight loss with acceptable safety. The FDA has traditionally used a threshold of ≥5% weight loss in a clinically meaningful share of patients, a bar both drugs clear easily. The main regulatory questions will be:

• Long-term safety (at least 1-2 years of data)
• Cardiovascular safety (either neutral or beneficial)
• Risk-benefit in specific populations (elderly, adolescents, kidney disease)
• Manufacturing quality and consistency

Summary of Key Comparisons

Metric	CagriSema (REDEFINE)	Retatrutide (TRIUMPH-4)
Phase 3 weight loss	-22.7% (68 weeks, REDEFINE-1)	-28.7% (68 weeks)
Molecular type	Two-molecule combination	Single peptide
Receptors	Amylin + GLP-1	GIP + GLP-1 + Glucagon
Weight loss mechanism	Dual appetite suppression	Appetite suppression + energy expenditure
Liver fat approach	Indirect (weight loss)	Direct (glucagon-mediated)
Liver fat reduction	Expected moderate-substantial	~82% (Phase 2)
GI nausea rate	55% (REDEFINE 1)	43.2% (12 mg, TRIUMPH-4)
CV outcomes data	None (semaglutide component has SELECT)	None
Manufacturer	Novo Nordisk	Eli Lilly
Expected approval	FDA decision expected by late 2026 (Novo)	Late 2027 to mid-2028
Prescribable now	No	No

Conclusion

Retatrutide and CagriSema are the two most promising next-generation obesity drugs, each aiming for 20%+ weight loss through a different multi-receptor strategy. Retatrutide’s Phase 3 TRIUMPH-4 result (-28.7% at 68 weeks) is currently the largest weight loss ever shown for a drug. CagriSema’s REDEFINE data (-22.7% at 68 weeks in REDEFINE-1) confirm it as a highly effective next-generation treatment.

The key difference may turn out to be mechanism: added energy use (retatrutide) versus double appetite suppression (CagriSema). That affects liver fat, the weight loss plateau and possibly body composition. Only head-to-head trials could settle which approach is better.

Until both finish Phase 3 and win approval, their relative standing is partly speculative. What is clear is that both are a big step beyond current approved options, and that the contest between Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk will keep pushing innovation that benefits patients.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is retatrutide more effective than CagriSema for weight loss?

Phase 3 data suggest retatrutide may produce more weight loss. TRIUMPH-4 showed -28.7% mean weight loss at 68 weeks, while CagriSema produced -22.7% at 68 weeks in REDEFINE-1 (20.4% counting everyone randomized). The two trials ran for the same length of time but enrolled different populations. CagriSema is under FDA review, retatrutide’s pivotal trials are complete, and comparisons across different programs are unreliable. Only a head-to-head trial could answer this for certain.

When will retatrutide and CagriSema be available?

Neither drug is approved yet. CagriSema is under FDA review and retatrutide’s pivotal trials are complete. CagriSema will probably reach the market first: in February 2026 Novo Nordisk said it expected an FDA decision by late 2026. Retatrutide’s earliest realistic approval is late 2027 to mid-2028, with filing planned no later than Q1 2027. Both timelines depend on regulatory review. For now, neither drug is available outside clinical trials.

Do retatrutide and CagriSema have different side effects?

Both cause GI side effects (nausea, diarrhea, vomiting) through their GLP-1 receptor activity. CagriSema may add extra nausea risk from its amylin component, which causes nausea through separate brain pathways. In Phase 3 TRIUMPH-4, retatrutide 12 mg had substantial GI event rates over 68 weeks (nausea 43.2%, diarrhea 33.1%, vomiting 20.9%). In REDEFINE 1, 55% of people on CagriSema reported nausea. Each drug also has its own theoretical safety questions: amylin-related ones for CagriSema (bone metabolism, CGRP cross-reactivity) and glucagon-related ones for retatrutide (liver glucose output, lean mass, dysesthesia). Phase 3 safety data from both programs will keep clarifying the real risks.

Which drug is better for fatty liver disease?

Retatrutide has a clear advantage in how it works on liver fat. Its glucagon component directly stimulates fat burning in liver cells, and it cut liver fat by about 82% in relative terms in Phase 2. CagriSema lowers liver fat indirectly through weight loss, which helps but is unlikely to match retatrutide’s direct effect. For people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), liver fat reduction could be the most important clinical difference between the two drugs.

Are these drugs as effective as bariatric surgery?

They are getting close. Bariatric surgery usually removes 25-35% of total body weight, depending on the procedure (gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy). Retatrutide’s Phase 3 result (-28.7% at 68 weeks, possibly before the curve flattened) falls squarely in that range. CagriSema’s 20-23% (REDEFINE-1 and REDEFINE-4) sits below the bottom of the surgical range but is still a big improvement over current drugs. Weight loss is only part of the picture, though. Durability, rates of metabolic disease resolution and long-term outcomes for drugs versus surgery need years more data.

Can I take retatrutide or CagriSema now?

Neither drug is approved for prescription use. The only way to get either is by enrolling in a clinical trial: the TRIUMPH program for retatrutide or the REDEFINE program for CagriSema. Ask your doctor whether you might be eligible. Never buy these compounds from unregulated online sources, which offer no guarantee of quality, accurate dosing or sterility.